New Open Access Criterion: Support access by machines (m2m)

Related to my last posting (FREE THE ARTICLES! (full-text for researchers & scientists and their machines)) and in the light of Peter Murray-Rust's recent annoying discovery that he cannot text-mine Pubmed Central (Can I data- and Text-mine Pubmed Central?), I would like to suggest an additional criterion to the definition of Open Access:
Open Access must include access by machines:
  • At minimum one must allow crawls of the site/content or (to reduce the impact of badly configured crawlers) create a compressed XML file containing all metadata and either content, or direct links to content and make it available for download (and if bandwidth is still an issue put it on a P2P network like BitTorrent).
  • Preferable is to offer some kind of API (OTMI) or protocol (OAI-PMH) to get at content and metadata and citations.
  • Better is to offer access to the XML of the articles in addition to the PDF and/or HTML; if the XML actually has some semantic content, then we are approaching the optimum.
The end goal is to support and encourage text mining and analysis of the full-text (preferably semantically rich XML), metadata and citations to allow literature-based exploration and discovery in support of the scientific research process.


Thanks to Peter Suber's Open Access News for the pointer to Peter Murray-Rust's difficulties.


Comments

Anonymous said…
I agree that machine-reading is a fundamental necessity to leverage the maximum capabilities of Open Access. At the moment, however, I hate to say that I think we need to win the first battle of simply getting more literature published under any OA paradigm, then worry more about how to make these resources accessible by crawlers.

My reasoning is that it's a fairly simple thing to implement code, for instance at the level of PubMedCentral, that will output a readable XML file of any document, whereas the sort of mass conversion of the publishing "norms" to Open Access is a much more complicated procedure.
07 April, 2008 13:37
Stevan Harnad said…
Meet the Old OA Criterion Before Demanding More

I think it would be a big strategic mistake if today, when the cupboards are still 85% bare, we were to start insisting that deposits must all be Cordon Bleu ****.

OA just means free online access to the full-text of refereed journal articles. Please let's not risk getting less by needlessly insisting on more. The rest will come in due time, but what is urgently needed today, and what is still 85% overdue by more than 10 years today, is free online access. Let the Green OA mandates provide that, and the rest will all come naturally with the territory soon enough of its own accord.

But over-reach gratuitously now, and we will just delay the optimal and inevitable, already within our reach, still longer.

Ceterum Censeo: The BBB "definitions" (which were not brought down to us by Moses from On High, but puttered together by muddled mortals, including myself) are not etched in stone, and need some tweaking to get them right.

"Time to Update the BBB Definition of Open Access"

OA is free online access. With that comes, automatically, the individual capability of linking, reading, downloading, storing, printing off, and data-mining (locally).

The further "rights" for 3rd-party databases to data-mine and re-publish will come after universal Green OA mandates generate universal OA (free online access). But you'll never get universal Green OA mandates if you insist in advance that the 3rd-party re-use rights must be part of the mandate! (Notice that the Harvard mandate has an opt-out, which means it's not a mandate.)

"On Patience, and Letting (Human) Nature Take Its Course"

And as to demanding machine-readable XML from authors: 85% of authors cannot now be bothered to do even the few keystrokes it takes to get them to deposit the drafts they already have: Does this sound like a reasonable time to ask them to upgrade their drafts to Cordon Bleu XML?

Stevan Harnad
American Scientist Open Access Forum
08 April, 2008 08:32
Glen Newton said…
Steven,

I have to agree with your points, but I still believe that we should plant the seeds with both the authors and the publishers about what is still needed. Perhaps we can call it something like OA-NG, where we could collect all of our "important-to-have but we'll put off to the near future" requirements. Having an open discussion about what is needed in the next generation of OA would both lay the groundwork for the core OA community as well as giving notice to the publishers et al. with respect to possible future demands on them. I am sure there are other communities besides the text mining community for which OA is a good thing but does not satisfy all of their interests.
08 April, 2008 09:39
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Java, MySql increased performance with Huge Pages

[Resources updates: 2010.07.07 , 2009.11.03 , 2009.05.27 ] Long running, large memory, high performant applications often have special needs with respect to their memory management. On Linux, Solaris and other modern OSes, the translation look-aside buffer ( TLB ) - whose page size of 4k for many CPUs/OSes - becomes a scalability issue in these extreme conditions. In order to get around TLB scalability issues, huge page sizes are used to reduce the impact on performance. This can be of use to installations with large scale Java, MySql and other large memory applications. 300% improvement : " Well, in my case, I was able to achieve an over 3x improvement in my EJB 3 application, of which fully 60 to 70% of that was due to using large page memory with a 3.5GB heap. Now, a 3.5GB heap without the large memory pages didn't provide any benefit over smaller heaps without large pages. Besides the throughput improvements, I also noticed that GC frequency was cut down by two-third...
Read more

IBM on Linux: "Lean, clean, and green"

IBM developerWorks has an article ( Linux: Lean, clean, and green: How GNU/Linux is becoming more eco-friendly - 26 May 2009) which examines some of the Green benefits of the Linux operating system. It focuses primarily on the low resource demands Linux has on systems (as well as its support for older systems), thus extending the life of machines that would otherwise be junked. Also discussed is virtualization and aspects of the Linux OS that reduce power consumption in servers. Additional Green Linux and Open Source resource: LessWatts.org - Saving Power on Intel systems with Linux Ten ways Linux can turn you green . 2009 Green Computing With Open Source Software . 2009 Open Source is Already Naturally Green: Fewer Lawyers, Fewer Showers, More Real People Add Up to Big Green Wins . 2009 Is Linux the Greenest Operating System . 2009 Go Green, Save Green with Linux . 2008 Linux captures the 'green' flag, beats Windows 2008 power-saving measures 2008 Canadian Green Party...
Read more

Postscript coding resources

Image
Postscript is one of my favourite programming languages. Resources for postscript programming are not too common, and are always popping up and then disappearing, as things tend to do on the Web. Here is a snapshot of links that work: I will do my best to keep them up-to-date.
Read more