Nanopublications LDF server

Matches in Nanopublications for { ?s <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#comment> ?o ?g. }

• association comment "The association was established by the amplicon metagenomic analysis of the gut content of the beetles, which revealed DNA of the object taxon." assertion.
• association comment "The association was established by the amplicon metagenomic analysis of the gut content of the beetles, which revealed DNA of the object taxon." assertion.
• FAIRsharing.a12316 comment "The Consortium of European Social Science Data Archives (CESSDA) Data Catalogue contains descriptions (metadata) of the more than 30,000 data collections held by CESSDA’s Service Providers (SP), representing 20 European countries. It is a one-stop shop for searching and finding data, enabling effective access to European social science data. The data described are varied. They may be quantitative, qualitative or mixed-modes data, cross-sectional or longitudinal, recently collected or historical data." assertion.
• Volcano comment "火山是地球表面的自然地质现象，它们是由地下岩浆上升到地表并释放岩浆，热气体和火山灰形成的。火山通常具有特定的地理特征和地质活动，对地壳和生态系统的演化具有重要意义。" assertion.
• Volcano comment "Volcanoes are natural geological phenomena on the Earth's surface where they are formed by underground magma rising to the surface and releasing magma, hot gases and volcanic ash. Volcanoes usually have specific geographic features and geological activity that have important implications for the evolution of the Earth's crust and ecosystems." assertion.
• emirates-stadium comment "This is the host stadium of the Arsenal club" assertion.
• home comment "The host stadium of AJAX club" assertion.
• Andover comment "This school is known to be one of the best in the USA. However I think it is pretentious and expensive." assertion.
• GFF-F1 comment "Principle F1 states that digital resources, i.e., data and metadata, must be assigned a globally unique and persistent identifier which serves as a permanent machine interpretable reference. The GO FAIR Foundation emphasises the need for persistence and global uniqueness, as well the property of resolvability of the identifiers (see also A1). Globally unique means that the identifier is guaranteed to unambiguously refer to the intended resources (where 'global' is intended to mean 'universal' as there are described digital assets outside the 'world'). Therefore, it is insufficient for it to be unique only locally (e.g. unique within a single, local database). Persistence refers to the requirement that this globally unique identifier is never reused in another context, and continues to identify the same resource over time, even if that resource should no longer exist, or moves from one digital environment to another. While global uniqueness is a technical property (i.e., an algorithm that can guarantee with mathematical precision that the issued identifiers are unique), persistence is a social commitment made by the stakeholder responsible for issuing the identifiers, that these identifiers will continue to map to the objects they identify for a defined period of time. An additional property supported by the GO FAIR Foundation is that the identifier is also ‘resolvable’ by machines. An identifier is most useful in a large-scale automated environment only when it can be resolved into (i.e., linked to) the object it identifies. Furthermore, the GO FAIR Foundation also assumes predictable identifier resolution behavior, allowing identifier resolution to behave consistently across multiple requests. Taken together, the GO FAIR Foundation assumes FAIR implementations to have Globally Unique, Persistent and Resolvable Identifiers (GUPRIs)." assertion.
• GFF-F2 comment "Whereas principle F1 enables unambiguous identification of resources of interest, principle F2 speaks to the ability to discover a resource of interest through, for example, search or filtering. Digital resources must be described with rich metadata – including descriptors of the content of the resource referred to by that identifier. It is hard to generally define the minimally required “richness” of this metadata, except that the more generous and comprehensive it is, both for humans and computers, the more specifically findable (in a meaningful way) it becomes in refined searches. Descriptive metadata are, therefore, extremely important in cross-domain search and interdisciplinary use cases [A]. For centuries, it has been common practice in the scholarly community to clearly reference research results through citations. To enable findability, the metadata required for citations is the minimum requirement and a number of works have defined the required properties (creator, title, publication date, publisher, and identifier) in a variety of documents [B]. Other works defined additional core metadata requirements for data discovery which may serve as a guideline [C]. Community specific metadata requirements, for examples those created in Metadata for Machine (M4M) workshops, may include additional metadata properties. While other principles specify metadata elements that must be present to support, for example, specific aspects of reusability (e.g. citation and license), principle F2 is primarily about discovery - that a digital resource that is well-described can be easily discovered even when the resource is unknown to the agent performing the search. Thus, this principle encourages data providers and domain experts to consider the various facets of search that might be employed by a user of their data, and to support those users in their discovery of the resource. To enable both global and local search engines to locate a resource, generic and domain-specific descriptors should be provided, that can be exposed to indexing by the relevant search facilities." assertion.
• GFF-F3 comment "Principle F3 implies that the resource (data, metadata, software or any other) has metadata that is separated from the actual resource they describe, but are nonetheless persistently linked via a GUPRI (linking metadata explicitly to the resource and vice versa, as described in FDOF specifications). Here we explicitly emphasize that implementation choice as crucial for a FAIR by design approach. The F3 principle states that any description of a digital resource must contain clearly and explicitly the identifier of that resource being described. For instance, the description of a computational workflow, should explicitly contain the identifier for that workflow in a manner that is unambiguous (well qualified, see Principle I3). This is especially important where the resource and its metadata are stored independently, but are nonetheless persistently linked, which is assumed to be the case by the GO FAIR Foundation. The purpose of this principle is twofold. First, it is perhaps trivial to say that a descriptor should explicitly say what resources it is describing; however, there is a second, less-obvious reason for this principle. Many digital objects (such as workflows, as mentioned above) have well-defined structures that may disallow the addition of new fields, including fields that could point to the metadata about that resource. Therefore, the only consistent way for both humans and machines to discover the metadata of a resource is through a search for the identifier of that resource. Thus, by requiring that a metadata descriptor contains the identifier of the thing being described, that identifier may then successfully be used as the search term to discover its metadata record. However, it should be clear that in many cases the identifier itself is not a regular search term. In fact the GO FAIR Foundation considers it good practice in FAIR to avoid semantic meaning in GUPRIs as these are be prone to change. That is why rich metadata are already defined in F2 of the guiding principles. When FAIR principle F3 mentions that the identifier of the object should be explicitly and clearly included in the object's metadata, our interpretation assumes "explicit" refers to the mere presence of the resources's identifier in the content of the metadata record while "clear" refers to having this identifier directly and unambiguously related to the metadata record by means of a known predicate. In previous experiments examining common usage, we have identified over 20 different ways that stakeholders sometimes use to declare which resource is being described by a given metadata record. This makes it very hard for humans and machines to, given a metadata record, identify which object this record describes." assertion.
• GFF-F4 comment "Principle F4 states that digital resources must be registered or indexed in a searchable resource (e.g., a search engine). The searchable resource provides the infrastructure by which a metadata record (made accessible with a GUPRI, F1) can be discovered, using either the attributes in that metadata (F2) or via the identifier of the resource itself (F3)." assertion.
• GFF-A1 comment "Typically, the purpose of identifying a digital resource is to simultaneously provide the ability to retrieve the record of that resource, in some format, using some clearly-defined mechanism. Principle A1 asserts that there should be no additional barrier to the retrieval of the record by a computational agent when its access protocol (A1.1 & A1.2) results in permitted access to that record. Note that the agent may be a machine working behind a firewall, if that agent has been permitted access. For fully mechanized access, this requires that the identifier (F1) follows a globally-accepted schema that is tied to a standardized, high-level communication protocol. FAIR, however, does not necessarily preclude non-mechanized access, only that the mechanism is so well described that a machine can identify the appropriate next course of action even if it should include human agents. In the latter case, it is still necessary that the identifier (F1) be sufficient as a way of unambiguously indicating, to a non-automated agent, the record that is being requested. The “standardized communication protocol” is critical here. Its purpose is to provide a predictable way for an agent to access a resource, regardless of whether the access to the content of the resource is open or restricted, and regardless of whether that access is automated or aided by human action (e.g., send your request for access by email or telephone)." assertion.
• GFF-A1.1 comment "The protocol (mechanism) by which a digital resource is accessed (e.g. queried) should not pose any bottleneck. It describes an access process, hence does not directly pertain to restrictions that apply to using the resource. The protocols underlying the World-Wide Web, such as HTTP, are an archetype for an open, free, and universally implementable protocol. Such protocols reduce the cost of gaining access to digital resources, because they are well defined and open and allow any individual to create their own standards-compliant implementation. That the access to the protocols specifications is free ensures that those lacking monetary means can equitably access the specifications and can implement them without occurring in any monetary obligations. That it is universally implementable ensures that the technology is available to all (and not restricted, for instance, by country or a sub-community), thus encompassing both the 'gratis' and 'libre' meaning of 'free'." assertion.
• GFF-A1.2 comment "This principle clearly demonstrates that following the FAIR guiding principles is not equal to making all data 'open'. Some digital resources, such as data that have access restrictions based on ethical, legal or contractual constraints, require additional conditions/steps to be accessed. This often pertains to assuring that the access requester is indeed that requester (authentication), that the requester's profile and credentials match the access conditions of the resource (authorization), and that the intended use matches permitted use cases (e.g. for a particular purpose only) (see also R1.1, where there are requirements to provide explicit documentation about who may use the data, and for what purposes). At the level of technical implementation, an additional authentication and authorization procedure must be specified, if it is not already defined by the protocol (see A1.1). A requester can be a human or a machine agent. In the latter case it is probably a proxy for a human or an organization to which the authentication and authorization protocol should be applied, in which case, the machine should be expected to present the appropriate credentials. The principle requires that a FAIR resource must provide such a protocol, but the protocol itself is not further specified. In practice, an Internet of FAIR Data and Services cannot function without implementing Authentication and Authorization Infrastructure, which includes AAI for machines and should thus be Ontology-based and machine actionable." assertion.
• GFF-A2 comment "There is a continued focus on keeping relevant digital resources available in the future. Data may no longer be accessible either by design (e.g. a defined lifespan within limited financial resources or legal requirements to destroy sensitive data) or by accident. However, given that those data may have been used and are referenced by others, it is important that consumers (including machines) have, at the very least, access to high quality and machine actionable metadata that describes those resources sufficiently to minimally understand their nature and their provenance, even when the relevant data are not available anymore. This principle relies heavily on the “second purpose” of principle F3 (the metadata record contains the identifier of the data), because in the case where the data record is no longer available, there must be a clear and precise way of discovering its historical metadata record. This aspect of accessibility is further elaborated in the Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles." assertion.
• GFF-I1 comment "Consumers spend a disproportionate amount of time trying to make sense of the digital resources they need and designing accurate ways to combine them. This is most often due to a lack of suitably unambiguous content descriptors, or a lack of such descriptors entirely with respect to non-machine-interpretable data formats such as tables or “generic” XML. Community-defined data exchange formats work reasonably well within their original scope of a few types of data and a relatively homogeneous community, but not well beyond that. This makes interoperation and integration an expensive, often impossible task (even for humans), but also means that machines cannot efficiently make use of digital resources, which is the primary goal of the FAIR guiding principles. For example, when a machine visits two data files in which a field “temperature” is present, then it will need more contextual descriptions to distinguish between weather data in one file and body temperature measurements in another. Achieving a “common understanding” of digital resources through a globally understood “language” for machines is the purpose of principle I1, with an emphasis on “knowledge” and “knowledge representation”. This becomes critical when many differently formatted resources need to be visited or combined across organizations and countries and is especially challenging for interdisciplinary studies or for meta-analyses, where results from independent organizations, pertaining to the same topic, must be combined. In this context, the principle says that producers of digital resources are required to use a language (i.e., a representation of data/knowledge) that has a defined mechanism for mechanized interpretation – a machine-readable “grammar” – where, for example, the difference between an entity, as well as any relevant relationship between entities, is defined in the structure of the language itself. This allows machines to consume the information with at least a basic “understanding” of its content. It is a step towards a common understanding of digital resources by machines, which is a prerequisite for a functional Internet of FAIR Data and Services. Several technologies can be chosen for principle I1." assertion.
• GFF-I2 comment "In Principle I2 we referred to “vocabularies” as the methods that unambiguously represent concepts that exist in a given domain. The use of shared, and formally structured (principle I1), sets of terms is an essential part of FAIR. Terminology systems, including flat “vocabularies”, hierarchical “thesauri” and more granular specifications of knowledge such as data models and consistently structured ontologies, play an important role in community standards. However, the vocabularies used for metadata or data also need to be findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable in their own right so that users (including machines) can fully understand the meaning of the terms used in the metadata. This principle has been criticized as “circular” but as has been made clear earlier in the Digital Intelligence article, the simple use of a “label” (e.g. “temperature”) is insufficient to enable a machine to understand both the intent of that label (Body temperature? Melting temperature?) and the contexts within which it can be properly linked – same-with-same – to other similarly-labelled data. I2, therefore, requires that the vocabulary terms used in the knowledge representation language (principle I1) can be sufficiently distinguished, by a machine, to resolve to the intended defined meaning and thus ensure detection and prevention of “false agreements” as well as “false disagreements” on exact meaning of the identifier." assertion.
• GFF-I3 comment "An important aspect of the I in FAIR is that data or metadata, generally speaking, does not exist in a silo – we must do what is necessary to ensure that the knowledge representing a resource is connected to that of other resources to create a meaningfully interlinked network of data and services. A “qualified reference” is a reference to another resource (i.e., referencing that external resource's persistent identifier), in which the nature of the relationship is also clearly specified. For instance, when multiple versions of a metadata file are available, it may be useful to provide links to prior or next versions using a named relation such as “prior version” or “next version” (using an appropriate community standard relationship that itself conforms to the FAIR principles). In the case of data, imagine a dataset that specifies the population of cities around the world. To be FAIR with respect to principle I3, the data could contain links to a resource containing city data, geographical and geospatial data, or other related domain resources that are generated by that city, so long as they are properly qualified references using meaningful, clearly-interpretable relationships. It is also important to note that many different metadata files (containers) being FAIR digital resources in themselves, can be pointing to the same “target” object (a data set or a workflow for instance). For instance a FAIR Digital Object constructed as a nanopublication can have intrinsic metadata (“what is this”) and how was it created (provenance type metadata) as well as “secondary” metadata that are for instance created (separately and later in time) by reusers of a particular digital resource. These could all be metadata containers essentially describing the same digital resource from different perspectives. This principle therefore also relates to the good practice to clearly distinguish between metadata (files/containers) and the resources they describe." assertion.
• GFF-R1 comment "At first glance, principle R1 appears very similar to principle F2. However, the rationale behind principle F2 is to enable effective attribute-based search and query (findability), while the focus of R1 is to enable machines and humans to assess if the discovered resource is appropriate for intended reuse, given a specific task. For example, not all gene expression data for a given locus are relevant to a study of the effects of heat stress. While irrelevant data may be discovered by the agent's initial search (principle F2) for expression data about a given gene, here we address the ability to assess and filter the discovered data based on suitability-for-purpose. This reiterates the need for good data stewards to consider not only high-level metadata facets, that will assist in generic search, but also to consider more detailed metadata that will provide much more “operational” instructions for re-use. In this setting, a wide variety of factors may be needed to determine whether a resource is suitable for inclusion in an analysis, and how to adequately process it. The term “plurality” is used to indicate that the metadata author should be as generous as possible, not narrowly presuming who the secondary consumers might be, and therefore provide as much metadata as possible to support the widest variety of use-cases and agent needs. The sub-principles R1.1, R1.2 and R1.3 further define some critical types of attributes that contribute to R1." assertion.
• GFF-R1.1 comment "Digital resources and their metadata must always, without exception, include a license that describes under which conditions the resource can be used, even if that is “unconditional”. By default, resources cannot be legally used without this clarity. Note also that a license that cannot be found by an agent, is effectively the same as no license at all. Furthermore, the license may be different for a data resource and the metadata that describes it, which has implications for the indexing of metadata v.v. findability. It also reiterates the need to separate and permalink data and metadata. This is a clear public domain statement, an equivalent such as terms of use or computer protocol to digitally facilitate an operation (for instance a smart contract). Thus, the absence of a license does not indicate “open”, but rather creates legal uncertainty that will deter (in fact, in many cases legally prevent) reuse. Note also that the combination of resources with permissive as well as more restrictive license conditions may lead to adverse effects, and ultimately preclude the use of the combined resources for particular purposes. In order to facilitate reuse, the license chosen should be as open as possible.(see additional criteria GFF)" assertion.
• GFF-R1.2 comment "Detailed provenance includes facets such as how the resource was generated, why it was generated, by whom, under what conditions, using what starting-data or source-resource, using what funding/resources, who owns the data, who should be given credit, and any filters or cleansing processes that have been applied post-generation. Provenance information helps people and machines assess whether a resource meets their criteria for their intended reuse, and what data manipulation procedures may be necessary in order to reuse it appropriately." assertion.
• GFF-R1.3 comment "Where community standards or best practices for data archiving and sharing exist, they should be followed. Several disciplinary communities have defined Minimal Information Standards describing most often the minimal set of metadata items required to assess the quality of the data acquisition and processing and to facilitate reproducibility. Such standards are a good start, noting that true (interdisciplinary) reusability will generally require richer metadata. For a list of such standards, consult for instance FAIRsharing. The required richness of the provenance metadata will be strongly dependent on the norms generated and agreed upon in the most related research communities." assertion.
• Interpretion comment "The FAIR Guiding Principles provide guidance when improving Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability of digital resources. But they do not dictate specific technological implementations. The GO FAIR Foundation believes that what ever FAIR implementation choices are made, they should always ensure, as much as possible, interoperability, machine-actionability, global participation and convergence towards accessible, robust, widespread and consistent FAIR implementations. Towards this end, the GO FAIR Foundation has consolidated from the community of FAIR experts, explicit interpretations of the FAIR Principles and implementation considerations. The aim is to provide a reference for continuing coherent dialogue on "what FAIR is" and a target, with minimal guarantees on machine-actionability, to which the community can confidently build towards. Following closely Jacobsen et al [2], the GO FAIR Foundation's interpretations are provided here as referenceable webpages:" assertion.
• Hourglass comment "The hourglass shape is meant to indicate increasing 'freedom to operate' (top and bottom) with only an absolute minimal standard at the center (FDOs, for example, nanopublications). Raw data (top) can be generated using any tools that are prefered, while data analysis (bottom) can also involve any tools that are prefered. FAIRification (top half) is the data harmonization step, but implemented in adherence to the FAIR Principles (using schema/models and controlled vocabularies). The Center of the hourglass is thus the FAIR-ready data/metadata produced in the FAIRification step, compliant to the minimal spec (for example, nanopublications). FAIR Orchestration (bottom half) is the 'putting FAIR into action', for example making FAIR-ready metadata accessible by machine agents using FAIR Data Points, Smart APIs, or similar technology. There are currently vigorous development initiatives emerging around essential FAIR Orchestration services." assertion.
• Openness comment "As open as possible, as restricted as necessary. Interpretation by the GO FAIR community and adopted by the GO FAIR Foundation. In an ideal world, all data and accompanying services would be open and free. However, in reality we deal with privacy issues, national security issues, commercial interests and other reasons for data or services to be less than open as in ‘libre’ and as in ‘gratuit. Next to privacy rights and regulations there are many other non-commercial reasons to keep data in environments with controlled and restricted access. The A in FAIR stands in fact for accessible, under well defined conditions. In the spirit of the machine actionability core of FAIR, (virtual) machines should be as well served in terms of Authentication and Authorisation Infrastructure (AAI), and understanding the conditions for reuse of data and other digital objects as people. In order to qualify whether a data or software resource will receive a positive ‘qualification’ from the GO FAIR Foundation we will have a nanopublication approach as well. In case the user asserts that the license (object) of the nanopublication is a fully open license (list will be provided) there will be ‘no further questions’. In case any of the more restricted licenses is chosen, a dropdown menu with ‘legitimate reasons’ to choose that license will appear, each with their own Globally Unique and Persistent Resolvable Identifier (GUPRI) and choosing one of these options will generate machine actionable results. Narrative explanations can be given as well and proposing additional reasons for restriction will also be a possibility." assertion.
• Distribution comment "The FAIR guiding principles do not explicitly require or recommend distributed approaches. However, in the spirit of the ‘Internet of FAIR data and services', the GO FAIR Foundation highly recommends to use distributed approaches wherever possible. Reasons are not only to keep ‘data at the source’ (including proper curation and metadata at the source for privacy reasons, enabling GDPR compliant data visiting for example), but also security aspects (distributed systems are more difficult to hack), distribution of workload and costs (expensive retrospective and central curation), and finally, less options for vendor lock in. This policy is therefore meant to stimulate the most requitable, open and transparent ecosystem with a level playing field and a ‘net neutrality aspect’ with full respect for ‘privacy by design’, ideally with the control over consent for reuse of personal data for particular purposes at the level of the individual (or designated proxy) and for other sensitive data by the data owner or custodian." assertion.
• No-lock-in comment "No single points of failure, no provider lock-in. The GFF strongly supports the principles of equitable access to data, information and knowledge for all, as a key feature of the envisioned Internet of FAIR Data and Services. Deliberate strategies for vendor- or provider lock in (both in the private and the public sector are considered highly undesirable. Nor only because they will introduce single points of failure in the ecosystem, but also because unequal and privileged access (for instance based on monetary barriers) is against the principle of equity and open science." assertion.
• Web_API comment "It is very important to provide clear and available descriptions of methods and classes that Web API is using" assertion.
• watch?v=F_bBTL1KLQQ comment "Great game!" assertion.
• Entelos comment "Entelos is a non-profit research institute providing advanced data management, computational tools, and predictive models to promote data-driven innovation and address various global challenges. Our research includes, among others, data management practices for R&D, drug discovery, materials design, hazard, and risk prediction. " assertion.
• NanoPharos comment "NanoPharos is a database providing high-quality datasets in a ready-for-modelling format for direct import in nanoinformatics (i.e., machine learning, AI) workflows." assertion.
• association comment "originally the budgerigar is from Australia" assertion.
• assertion comment "Seed-borne diseases: these include seed-borne scab, seed-borne Stagonospora (previously known as Septoria), common bunt (stinking smut), and loose smut. These are managed with fungicides." assertion.
• RAVe44XDnx comment "An inspirational example of what one can achieve through hard work, dedication, and endless tenacity." assertion.
• ?ref_=tt_ov_rt comment "I rate the movie Inception a nine." assertion.
• full.html comment "This website by MIT university offers the full play for free online. Therefore, it is a great source for everyone to read the play!" assertion.
• menu-nl comment "The coffee is way too expensive for how good it is." assertion.
• RArzWtPbwyaBJH60lmakidO0axvW34O3lK8b7meAxYjG8 comment "Could it be that chamber music is just not relevant anymore?" assertion.
• Q55 comment "The Netherlands has made many contributions to the world of visual art. Dutch masters like Rembrandt, Vermeer and Van Gogh produced works that are still admired globally." assertion.
• saudi-arabia-signals-interest-in-champions-league-football-entry comment "bla bla bla alb albl bla bla bla" assertion.
• watch?v=SEItn9Csitg comment "This video gives a brief view on the concept of early retirement, covering concepts such as the 4% rule" assertion.
• xyz comment "books can be found in libraries" assertion.
• Q219067 comment "Physical exercise in a gym could entail personal cardio or weightlifting workouts or group lessons such as yoga, CrossFit or Pilates." assertion.
• s10865-015-9640-7 comment "Exercise habit formation in new gym members: a longitudinal study" assertion.
• Q50719 comment "It's a great station. The flying wheel on top of the dome always makes me laugh!" assertion.
• SPA.2019.8936738 comment "This is a very detailed paper and it's all reasoned well. There aren't many similarities between album covers and music genres, but the research was done well." assertion.
• saudi-arabia-signals-interest-in-champions-league-football-entry comment "My opinion for Saudi Arabia football teams to join the UEFA Champions League is negative because they will change the idea of European Football which is connected with Fair Play, healthy competition and plessure to fans with every matchday. Saudi Arabia football is totally different and is built against every human right and just for money laundring from their oil industries." assertion.
• Q1079 comment "a television series first aired on September 9th, 2018" assertion.
• Outline_of_human_anatomy comment "The content is a bit outdated for lacking information on the fascia system." assertion.
• www.nu.nl comment "Calls itself a news website but only shows what they want to let you know" assertion.
• gta-v?info=o488o comment "The "San Andreas Mercenaries" update for GTA Online offers an engaging storyline, cooperative gameplay with varied missions, new content for Hangars, Avenger upgrades, new vehicles, a Tactical SMG, and rebalancing of the in-game economy. These additions enhance the gameplay experience and cater to a diverse range of player preferences, demonstrating the developers' responsiveness to player feedback. The introduction of a new storyline involving Los Santos Angels and Charlie Reed's quest to take down Merryweather Security adds depth and intrigue to the GTA Online experience. It's great to see a more focused narrative within the open-world environment." assertion.
• WDCC comment "World Data Centre for Climate is a Long Term Archiving Service for large research data sets which are relevant for climate or Earth system research. This service includes archiving and retrieval capability of data for time periods of 10 years or longer. The long-term archive (LTA) of DKRZ is certified according to the criteria of the Core Trust Seal (CTS) and is, as World Data Centre for Climate (WDCC), accredited as regular member of the World Data System." assertion.
• watch?v=aircAruvnKk&list=PLZHQObOWTQDNU6R1_67000Dx_ZCJB-3pi comment "This is a great educational resource explaining how neural networks work." assertion.
• Hospitals comment "are free and dark depressing soemetimes but I never felt more alive in one of them." assertion.
• Hospitals comment "are free and dark depressing soemetimes but I never felt more alive in one of them." assertion.
• www.olvg.nl comment "great service and always caring and nice workers." assertion.
• Disney comment "Disney is renowned for its family-friendly entertainment, continuous innovation, and profound cultural influence. Their works like "The Lion King" and "Aladdin" have been beloved by audiences worldwide, and Disney theme parks are a top choice for family vacations. Overall, Disney plays a significant role in the global entertainment industry, shaping the entertainment experiences of generations." assertion.
• watch?v=oAHbLRjF0vo comment "Cool video to show how boarding an airplane really should be done" assertion.
• schemaorg-current-https.ttl comment "This website has helped me a lot trough this course" assertion.
• schemaorg-current-https.ttl comment "This page was useful for this course" assertion.
• index.nl.html?label=gen173nr-1DCAEoggI46AdIM1gEaKkBiAEBmAEcuAEHyAEN2AED6AEBiAIBqAIDuALD45upBsACAdICJDhjOTk2NjJmLWE4MDgtNDAzYy1iOTIzLWUwNjBmMzllMTgzNtgCBOACAQ&sid=b4172346cc9b8f16af4a9c26483b5171&keep_landing=1&sb_price_type=total& comment "I recently used this booking site to plan my vacation, and it provided a seamless and convenient booking experience. The interface is user-friendly, and I had no issues making reservations for my accommodations and activities." assertion.
• j.copsyc.2020.04.005 comment "Very insightful" assertion.
• MetaXa comment "Via MetaXa, a graphical user interface (GUI), metadata belonging to your data can be entered . Before you can use this application, you need an WDCC account. If you do not have one already, please apply for an account. In MetaXA you can enter metadata for the different hierarchical elements: Projects, Experiments, Dataset groups, and Datasets. Furthermore, you can add (or edit) a Person, add an Additional Info or a Citation/Reference." assertion.
• WDCCUserGuide comment "The WDCC User Guide guides users step-by-step through the process of publishing data in the WDCC." assertion.
• WDCCUserGuide comment "The WDCC User Guide guides users step-by-step through the process of publishing data in the WDCC." assertion.
• WDCCUserGuide comment "The WDCC User Guide guides users step-by-step through the process of publishing data in the WDCC." assertion.
• 3209581 comment "This paper is written with much thought and discusses the problems of bias on the web" assertion.
• assertion comment "DNA extracted from subsample of whole specimen from Queensland Museum spirit collection (Sessile Marine Invertebrates), accession number QM G329283 (=QMG329283), urn:lsid:ozcam.taxonomy.org.au:QM:Porifera:G329283." assertion.
• assertion comment "Very interesting article related to Biodiversity" assertion.
• RAUzalz-5XXJHA6cXSCermkp6SHd5Q2Bno0S7jLAcWs2w%23DEIMS-SDR comment "DEIMS-SDR (Dynamic Ecological Information Management System - Site and Dataset Registry) is an information management system for the discovery of long-term environmental research and monitoring facilities around the globe, along with the data gathered at those sites and the people and networks associated with them. DEIMS-SDR includes metadata such as site location, ecosystem, facilities, parameters measured and research themes." assertion.
• DEIMS-SDR comment "DEIMS-SDR (Dynamic Ecological Information Management System - Site and Dataset Registry) is an information management system for the discovery of long-term environmental research and monitoring facilities around the globe, along with the data gathered at those sites and the people and networks associated with them. DEIMS-SDR includes metadata such as site location, ecosystem, facilities, parameters measured and research themes." assertion.
• CLARIN-AAI comment "AAI (Authentication and Authorization Infrastructure) for the CLARIN project." assertion.
• ROHub comment "ROHub is a Research object management platform supporting the preservation and lifecycle management of scientific investigations, research campaigns and operational processes. " assertion.
• RAQ6rmwxjcMOS3Msq0A6_GsUyyWz5Sd0w5iFxVyzGwxvk comment "This is a list of concrete RDF stream types in RDF-STaX, to be used in a nanopub template for annotating stream types." pubinfo.
• assertion comment "The authors state that for their proposed system, 'the streaming element (i.e. a single message) (...) is a set of triples'. Therefore, internally it uses an RDF graph stream." assertion.
• assertion comment "The authors state that for their proposed system, 'the streaming element (i.e. a single message) (...) is a set of triples'. Therefore, internally it uses an RDF graph stream." assertion.
• assertion comment "The proposed system (IPSM) outputs to Kafka a stream of RDF datasets. This can be observed in IPSM's source code from the INTER-IoT project." assertion.
• assertion comment "The DBpedia-Live service published two streams of RDF graphs – for added and deleted triples." assertion.
• assertion comment "At a high level, ERI streams a flat sequence of triples." assertion.
• assertion comment "ERI splits the flat RDF triple stream into discrete elements (blocks). Each block is an RDF graph, therefore ERI uses an RDF graph stream on this level." assertion.
• assertion comment "ERI splits the incoming flat RDF triple stream into discrete blocks, which are then split into a sequence of subject-molecules (RDF subgraphs with a single subject). Thus, within the scope of a a single block, ERI uses an RDF subject graph stream." assertion.
• assertion comment "The presented solution (Graph of Things) appears to use RDF graph streams, as can be inferred from Fig. 1. There, a single "snapshot" (element) of the stream is presented to be an RDF graph." assertion.
• assertion comment "Jelly streams a flat sequence of triples or quads, on a high level." assertion.
• assertion comment "Jelly splits the incoming flat RDF stream into discrete elements (stream frames) that are either RDF graphs or RDF datasets. Therefore, on the lower level it uses RDF dataset/graph streams." assertion.
• assertion comment "The authors mention that flat RDF triple streams are sometimes used, however, they advocate for the use of RDF graph streams (Requirement #5)." assertion.
• assertion comment "The paper calls for using streams of RDF graphs for social media monitoring (Requirement #5)." assertion.
• assertion comment "The proposed EXI-based protocol streams RDF graphs over the network." assertion.
• assertion comment "The proposed RDSZ protocol stream RDF graphs over the network." assertion.
• assertion comment "The RSP Data Model introduces the RDF Stream as a stream of timestamped named graphs, with the same structure as in RDF-STaX. The RDF-STaX definition was in fact derived from the RSP Data Model." assertion.
• assertion comment "The RSP Data Model draft specifies in section "Timestamped Graphs" that "A sequence of RDF graphs (or named graphs, or RDF datasets) MAY be physically received by an RSP engine, which MAY then create an RDF stream from it by adding timestamps, e.g. indicating the time of arrival. The original sequence is not itself an RDF stream."" assertion.
• assertion comment "The proposed S-HDT protocol streams RDF graphs over a serial connection." assertion.
• assertion comment "The proposed TA-RDF model for temporal/streaming RDF has a direct translation to RDF. In that translation, each element in the stream corresponds to an RDF subgraph, with a specific node indicating the subject of the element." assertion.
• assertion comment "In the proposed approach, an RDF stream is published as a sequence of RDF graphs, with each graph having a unique URI. Each URI points to a node (the subject) within one of the graphs." assertion.
• assertion comment "RMLMapper-SISO outputs a stream of results of the RML annotation process, which should be a stream of datasets. However, the source code of the application appears only to be able to handle outputting RDF graphs. I am not sure whether this is right or not." assertion.
• assertion comment "The output of the Semantic Annotation enabler from ASSIST-IoT is a stream of RDF datasets." assertion.
• assertion comment "The approach describes RDF streams which are represented using named graphs as elements. Each graph is associated with a temporal property in the default graph." assertion.
• assertion comment "The paper discusses a model for temporal RDF which is represented with each stream element being a named graph. The named graph has temporal information about it in the default graph." assertion.
• assertion comment "The proposed approach (TripleWave) uses the RSP Data Model to represent its streams." assertion.
• assertion comment "The proposed approach (TripleWave) uses the RSP Data Model to represent its streams." assertion.

• first
• previous
• next