This event has ended. Create your own event on Sched.
Join the 2020 ESIP Winter Meeting Highlights Webinar on Feb. 5th at 3 pm ET for a fast-paced overview of what took place at the meeting. More info here.

Sign up or log in to bookmark your favorites and sync them to your phone or calendar.

Forest Glen [clear filter]
Tuesday, January 7

11:00am EST

FAIR Metadata Recommendations
We will discuss the FAIR metadata recommendations that were introduced at the ESIP Summer Meeting. How to Prepare for this Session: Use git repository: Issues

Use git repository: 

View Recording:https://youtu.be/5hwZOLQ1p9M.

  • NCEAS is continuing to work on pinning down what are the fundamental characteristics for FAIR data. Have the suite of checks (e.g. is title present). 54 are currently implemented and they are working toward a community define 1.0 check suite. This is a good tool for data curators but has the potential to be misunderstood or misused - need a public FAIR metric. Public FAIR metric is high level and simple and includes only items that everyone agrees upon.
  • Future plans to create community specific custom FAIR suite checks to handle the variability of how metadata is hosted. Continually evaluating if checks are helping/hurting the data curators. Work is needed on the user interface - how do we ensure that metadata evaluation is a positive experience regardless of the score.
  • Reusability is typically low throughout the data repositories. Accessibility needs a greater focus as it’s hindered by broken/missing links. “When you decide what fields are mandatory (vs optional) you decide what metadata you get”

avatar for Ted Habermann

Ted Habermann

Chief Game Changer, Metadata Game Changers
I am interested in all facets of metadata needed to discover, access, use, and understand data of any kind. Also evaluation and improvement of metadata collections, translation proofing. Ask me about the Metadata Game.
avatar for Matt Jones

Matt Jones

Director of Informatics R&D, DataONE / NCEAS / UC Santa Barbara
DataONE | Arctic Data Center | Open Science | Provenance and Semantics | Scientific Synthesis

Tuesday January 7, 2020 11:00am - 12:30pm EST
Forest Glen
  Forest Glen, Breakout

2:00pm EST

Making a Good First Impression: Metadata Quality Metrics for Earth Observation Data and Information
Metadata is often the first information that a user interacts with when looking for data. Understanding that there is typically only one chance to make a good impression, data and information repositories have placed an emphasis on metadata quality as a way of increasing the likelihood that a user will have a favorable first impression. This session will explore quality metrics, badging or scoring, and metadata quality assessment approaches within the Earth observation community. Discussion questions include:
● Does your organization implement metadata quality metrics and/or scores?
○ What are the key metrics that the scores are based on?
○ What priorities are driving your metadata quality metrics? For example, different repositories have different priorities. These priorities can include an emphasis on discoverability, accessibility, usability, provenance, etc...
● Does your organization make metadata quality scores publically viewable? What are the pros and cons of making the scores publically accessible?
How to Prepare for this Session:


View Recording: https://youtu.be/lbza3gEHmtQ

  • Visualizations of the metadata quality metrics need to be easily understood or well documented to be effective
  • There are diverse ideas and current metrics that are being rolled out soon (U.S. Global Change Research Program & NCA)
  • Ensuring that metrics interact with existing standards such as FAIR is also important

avatar for Amrutha Elamparuthy

Amrutha Elamparuthy

GCIS Data Manager, U.S. Global Change Research Program

Tuesday January 7, 2020 2:00pm - 3:30pm EST
Forest Glen
  Forest Glen, Breakout

4:00pm EST

Bringing Science Data Uncertainty Down to Earth - Sub-orbital, In Situ, and Beyond
In the Fall of 2019, the Information Quality Cluster (IQC) published a white paper entitled “Understanding the Various Perspectives of Earth Science Observational Data Uncertainty”. The intention of this paper is to provide a diversely sampled exposition of both prolific and unique policies and practices, applicable in an international context of diverse policies and working groups, made toward quantifying, characterizing, communicating and making use of uncertainty information throughout the diverse, cross-disciplinary Earth science data landscape; to these ends, the IQC addressed uncertainty information from the following four perspectives: Mathematical, Programmatic, User, and Observational. These perspectives affect policies and practices in a diverse international context, which in turn influence how uncertainty is quantified, characterized, communicated and utilized. The IQC is now in a scoping exercise to produce a follow-on paper that is intended to provide a set of recommendations and best practices regarding uncertainty information. It is our hope that we can consider and examine additional areas of opportunity with regard to the cross-domain and cross-disciplinary aspects of Earth science data. For instance, the existing white paper covers uncertainty information from the perspective of satellite-based remote sensing well, but does not adequately address the in situ or airborne (i.e., sub-orbital) perspective. This session intends to explore such opportunities to expand the scope of the IQC’s awareness of what is being done with regard to uncertainty information, while also providing participants and observers with an opportunity to weigh in on how best to move forward with the follow-on paper. How to Prepare for this Session:Agenda:
  1. "IQC Uncertainty White Paper Status Summary and Next Steps" - Presented by: David Moroni (15 minutes)
  2. "Uncertainty quantification for in situ ocean data: The S-MODE sub-orbital campaign" - Presented by: Fred Bingham (15 minutes)
  3. "Uncertainty Quantification for Spatio-Temporal Mapping of Argo Float Data" - Presented by Mikael Kuusela (20 minutes)
  4. Panel Discussion (35 minutes)
  5. Closing Comments (5 minutes)
Notes Page: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vfYBK_DLTAt535kMZusTPVCBAjDqptvT0AA5D6oWrEc/edit?usp=sharing


View Recording: https://youtu.be/vC2O8FRgvck


avatar for David Moroni

David Moroni

Applied Sciences System Engineer, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Physical Oceanography Distributed Active Archive Center
I am a Senior Applied Science Systems Engineer at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), former Data Publication team lead (2018-2021) for the PO.DAAC Project, Systems Engineer for the MAAP-AWS-HEC task, Applied Science Systems Engineer for the MAIA Early Adopters, and co-Investigator... Read More →
avatar for Ge Peng

Ge Peng

Research Scholar, CISESS/NCEI
Dataset-centric scientific data stewardship, data quality management

Fred Bingham

University of North Carolina at Wilmington

Mikael Kuusela

Carnegie Mellon University

Tuesday January 7, 2020 4:00pm - 5:30pm EST
Forest Glen
Wednesday, January 8

11:00am EST

Software Sustainability, Discovery and Accreditation
It is commonly understood that software is essential to research, in data collection, curation, analysis, and understanding, and it is also a critical element within any research infrastructure. This session will address two related software issues: 1) sustainability, and 2) discovery and accreditation.

Because scientific software is an instance of a software stack containing problem-specific software, discipline-specific tools, general tools and middleware, and infrastructural software, changes within the stack can cause the overall software to collapse and stop working, and as time goes on, work is increasingly needed to compensate for these problems, which we refer to as sustainability. Issues in which we are interested include incentives that encourage sustainability activities, business models for sustainability (including public-private partnership), software design that can reduce the sustainability burden, and metrics to measure sustainability (perhaps tied to the on-going process of defining FAIR software).

The second issue, discovery and accreditation, asks how we enable users to discover and access trustworthy and fit-for-purpose software to undertake science processing on the compute infrastructures to which they have access? And how do we ensure that publications cite the exact version of software that was used and is cited and properly credited the responsible authors?

This session will include a number of short talks, and at least two breakouts in parallel, one about the sustainability of software, and a second about discovery of sustainable and viable solutions.

Potential speakers who want to talk about an aspect of software sustainability, discovery, or accreditation should contact the session organizers.

Presentations: See above

View Recording:

Key takeaways:

1. Funding agencies spend a large amount of money on software, but don't always know this because it's not something that they track.

OpenSource software is growing very quickly:
  • 2001: 208K SourceForge users
  • 2017: 20M GitHub users
  • 2019: 37M Github users
Software, like data, is a “first class citizen” in the ecosystem of tools and resources for scientific research and our community is accelerating their attention to this as they have for FAIR data

2. Ideas for changing our culture to better support and reward contributions to sustainable software:
  • Citation (ESIP guidelines) and/or software heritage IDs for credit and usage metrics and to meet publisher requirements (e.g. AGU)
  • Prizes
  • Incentives in hiring and promotion
  • Promote FAIR principles and/or Technical Readiness Levels for software
  • Increased use to make science more efficient through common software
  • Publish best practice materials in other languages, e.g. Mandarin, as software comes from a global community

3. A checklist of topics to consider for your community sustained software:
  • Repository with “cookie cutter” templates and sketches for forking
  • Licensing
  • Contributors Guide
  • Code of Conduct and Governance
  • Use of “Self-Documentation” features and standards
  • Easy step for trying out software
  • Continuous Integration builds
  • Unit tests
  • Good set of “known first issues” for new users trying out the software
  • Gitter or Slack Channel for feedback and communication, beyond a simple repo issues queue

Detailed notes:
The group then divided into 2 breakout sessions (Sustainability; Discovery and Accreditation), with notes as follows.

Notes from Sustainability breakout (by Daniel S. Katz):

What we think should be done:
  • Build a cookiecutter recipe for new projects, based on Ben’s slides?  What part of ESIP would be interested in this? And would do it, and support it?
  • Define governance as part of this? How do we store governance?
  • What is required, what is optional (maybe with different answers at different tiers)
  • Define types of projects (individual developer, community code, …)
  • Define for different languages – tooling needs to match needs
  • Is this specific to ESIP? Who could it be done with? The Carpentries?  SSI?

Other discussion:
  • What do we mean by sustainability – for how long?  Up to 50 years?  How do we run the system?
  • What’s the purpose of the software (use case) – transparency to see the software, actual reuse?
  • What about research objects that contain both software and data? How do we archive them? How do we cite them?
  • We have some overlap with research object citation cluster

Notes from Discovery and Accreditation breakout (by Shelley Stall):

Use Cases - Discovery
  1. science question- looking for software to support
  2. have some data output from a software process, need to gain access to the software to better understand the data.   

Example of work happening: Data and Software Preservation - NSF Funded
  • promote linked data to other research products
  • similar project in Australia - want to gain access to the chain of events that resulted in the data and/or software - the scientific drivers that resulted in this product
  • Provenance information is part of this concept.

A deeper look at discovery, once software is found, is to better understand how the software came into being. It is important to know the undocumented elements of a process that effected/impacted the chain of events that are useful information to understand for a particular piece of software.
How do we discover existing packages?
Dependency management helps to discover new elements that support software.
Concern expressed that packaged solution for creating an environment, like “AWS/AMI”, are not recognized as good enough, that an editor requested a d

avatar for Daniel Katz

Daniel Katz

Chief Scientist, NCSA; Research Associate Professor, CS, iSchool, ECE, University of Illinois
Dan is Chief Scientist at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) and Research Associate Professor in Computer Science, Electrical and Computer Engineering, and the School of Information Sciences (iSchool), at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. In past... Read More →
avatar for Lesley Wyborn

Lesley Wyborn

Honorary Professor, Australian National University

Wednesday January 8, 2020 11:00am - 12:30pm EST
Forest Glen
  Forest Glen, Working Session

2:00pm EST

FAIR Laboratory Instrumentation, Analytical Procedures, and Data Quality
Acquisition and analysis of data in the laboratory are pervasive in the Earth, environmental, and planetary sciences. Analytical and experimental laboratory data, often acquired with sophisticated and expensive instrumentation, are fundamental for understanding past, present, and future processes in natural systems, from the interior of the Earth to its surface environments on land, in the oceans, and in the air, to the entire solar system. Despite the importance of provenance information for analytical data including, for example, sample preparation or experimental set up, instrument type and configuration, calibration, data reduction, and analytical uncertainties, there are no consistent community-endorsed best practices and protocols for describing, identifying, and citing laboratory instrumentation and analytical procedures, and documenting data quality. This session is intended as a kick-off working session to engage researchers, data managers, and system engineers, to contribute ideas how to move forward with and accelerate the development of global standard protocols and the promulgation of best practices for analytical laboratory data. How to Prepare for this Session:


View Recording:

  • Analytical and experimental data are collected widely in both the field and laboratory settings from a variety of earth environmental and planetary sciences, spanning a variety of disciplines. FAIR use of such data is dependent of data provenance. 
  • Need community exchange of such data consider use of data is broader than the original use of data in the domain. Brings to mind interoperability of such data. Need networks of these data to be plugged into evolving CI systems. In seismology a common standard for data implemented by early visionaries was a massive boon to the field. 
  • Documentation of how analytical data were generated is time consuming for data curators providers etc. Having standards/protocols for data exchange protocols is urgently required for emerging global data networks. OneGeochemistry as example use case for international research group to establish a global network for discoverable geochemical data.

avatar for Lesley Wyborn

Lesley Wyborn

Honorary Professor, Australian National University
avatar for Kerstin Lehnert

Kerstin Lehnert

President, IGSN e.V.
Kerstin Lehnert is Doherty Senior Research Scientist at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University and Director of the Interdisciplinary Earth Data Alliance that operates EarthChem, the System for Earth Sample Registration, and the Astromaterials Data System. Kerstin... Read More →

Wednesday January 8, 2020 2:00pm - 3:30pm EST
Forest Glen
  Forest Glen, Working Session

4:00pm EST

Emerging EnviroSensing Topics: Long-range, Low-power, Non-contact, Open-source Sensor Networks
Led by the ESIP EnviroSensing Cluster, this session is open to scientists, information managers, and technologists interested in the general topic of environmental sensing for science and management.

Rapid advances and decreasing costs in technology, as applied to environmental sensing systems, are promoting a shift from sparsely-distributed, single-mission observations toward employing affordable, high-fidelity, ecosystem monitoring networks driven by a need to forecast outcomes across timescales. In this session we will hear talks on new approaches to standing up long-range, low-power monitoring networks; the value(s) added by non-contact sensing (local-remote to satellite based sensing); as well as innovative sensor developments, including open-source approaches, that promote connectivity. The session will conclude with a 20-minute topical discussion open to all in attendance. How to Prepare for this Session:

List of speakers and presentation titles for this session:
  • Jacqueline Le Moigne: NASA
    Future Earth Science Measurements Using New Observing Strategies
  • David Coyle: USGS
    USGS NGWOS LPWAN Experiment: Leveraging LoRaWAN Sensor Platform Technologies
  • James Gallagher: OPeNDAP
    Sensors in Snowy Alpine Environments: Sensor Networks with LoRa, Progress Report
    View Slides: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.11555784.v1 
  • Daniel Fuka: Va Tech
    Making Drones Interesting Again
    View Slides: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.11663718.v1
  • Joseph Bell: USGS
    Deep-dive discussion after presentations. A topic of interest is documenting test efforts and the publication of peer-reviewed Test Reports

View Recording: https://youtu.be/dXTLqt-5Ai8

  • As monitoring expands across agencies and from point measures on the surface of the earth to monitoring using networks of satellites in space (internet of space) there is a growing need to increase communication among agencies and instrumentation alike
  • Inexpensive monitoring equipment is becoming readily available with large gains being made in the areas of function, reliability, and resolution/accuracy.
    • Market disruption
    • Edge -Computing (is this the current form of SDI-12-style monitoring?) local processing and storage, transmission of small/tiny data payloads
  • There appears to be a need across disciplines and agencies for a peer-reviewed test reports
    • Not resource intensive to publish
    • Available to all users (FAIR)
    • Provides details on test plan and provides test data whenever applicable.

avatar for Joseph Bell

Joseph Bell

Hydrologist, USGS

Wednesday January 8, 2020 4:00pm - 5:30pm EST
Forest Glen
  Forest Glen, Breakout
Thursday, January 9

10:15am EST

Working Group for the Data Stewardship Committee
This session is a working group for the 2020-2021 year for the Data Stewardship committee. We will discuss priorities for the next year, potential collaborative outputs, and review the work in progress from the last year. 

Notes Document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B_0K5jGnFgH72U3P2-oGr5vEqHOGU8CWU-IkZ6pjXbM/edit?ts=5e174588


View Recording: https://youtu.be/am-ZLfHgM4w

  • Wow, the members of the Committee really are active! Practically everyone has their own cluster or two!
  • Six activities proposed for the upcoming year have champions who will lead the effort to define the outputs of their selected activity.

avatar for Alexis Garretson

Alexis Garretson

Community Fellow, ESIP
avatar for Kelsey Breseman

Kelsey Breseman

Rita Allen Civic Science Fellow, Environmental Data & Governance Initiative
Governmental accountability around public data & the environment. Decentralized web. Intersection of tech & ethics & civics.

Thursday January 9, 2020 10:15am - 11:45am EST
Forest Glen
  Forest Glen, Business Meeting

12:00pm EST

License Up! What license works for you and your downstream repositories?
Many repositories are seeing an increase in the use and diversity of licenses and other intellectual property management (IPM) tools applied to externally-created data submissions and software developed by staff. However, adding a license to data files may have unexpected or unintended consequences in the downstream use or redistribution of those data. Who “owns” the intellectual property rights to data collected by university researchers using Federal and State (i.e., public) funding that must be deposited at a Federal repository? What license is appropriate for those data and what — exactly — does that license allow and disallow? What kind of license or other IPM instrument is appropriate for software written by a team of Federal and Cooperative Institute software engineers? Is there a significant difference between Creative Commons, GNU, and other ‘open source licenses’?

We have invited a panel of legal advisors from Federal and other organizations to discuss the implications of these questions for data stewards and the software teams that work collaboratively with those stewards. We may also discuss the latest information about Federal data licenses as it applies to the OPEN Government Data Act of 2019. How to Prepare for this Session: Consider what, if any, licenses, copyright, or other intellectual property rights management you apply or think applies to your work. Also consider Federal requirements such as the OPEN Government Data Act of 2019, Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

Dr. Robert J. Hanisch is the Director of the Office of Data and Informatics, Material Measurement Laboratory, at the National Institute of Standards and Technology in Gaithersburg, Maryland. He is responsible for improving data management and analysis practices and helping to assure compliance with national directives on open data access. Prior to coming to NIST in 2014, Dr. Hanisch was a Senior Scientist at the Space Telescope Science Institute, Baltimore, Maryland, and was the Director of the US Virtual Astronomical Observatory. For more than twenty-five years Dr. Hanisch led efforts in the astronomy community to improve the accessibility and interoperability of data archives and catalogs.
Henry Wixon is Chief Counsel for the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) of the U.S. Department of Commerce. His office provides programmatic legal guidance to NIST, as well as intellectual property counsel and representation to the Department of Commerce and other Department bureaus. In this role, it interacts with principal developers and users of research, including private and public laboratories, universities, corporations and governments. Responsibilities of Mr. Wixon’s office include review of NIST Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs), licenses, Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) and Material Transfer Agreements (MTAs), and the preparation and prosecution of the agency’s patent applications. As Chief Counsel, Mr. Wixon is active in standing Interagency Working Groups on Technology Transfer, on Bayh-Dole, and on Research Misconduct, as well as in the Federal Laboratory Consortium. He is a Certified Licensing Professional and a Past Chair of the Maryland Chapter of the Licensing Executives Society, USA and Canada (LES), and is a member of the Board of Visitors of the College of Computer, Mathematical and Natural Sciences of the University of Maryland, College Park.

See attached

View Recording: https://youtu.be/5Ng5FDW1LXk.



Don Collins

Oceanographer, NESDIS/NCEI Archive Branch
about me: oceanographer and archivist at NOAA NCEItalk to me about: Send2NCEI, NCEI archival processes, records management, data DOIs, data licenses, croquet

Thursday January 9, 2020 12:00pm - 1:30pm EST
Forest Glen
  Forest Glen, Panel