“…sequence of research activities) of research articles. Others describe scholarly knowledge with linked entities such as problem, method, theory, statement [19,50], or focus on the main research findings and characteristics of research articles described in surveys with concepts such as problems, approaches, implementations, and evaluations [40,106].…”
Current science communication has a number of drawbacks and bottlenecks which have been subject of discussion lately: Among others, the rising number of published articles makes it nearly impossible to get a full overview of the state of the art in a certain field, or reproducibility is hampered by fixed-length, document-based publications which normally cannot cover all details of a research work. Recently, several initiatives have proposed knowledge graphs (KG) for organising scientific information as a solution to many of the current issues. The focus of these proposals is, however, usually restricted to very specific use cases. In this paper, we aim to transcend this limited perspective and present a comprehensive analysis of requirements for an Open Research Knowledge Graph (ORKG) by (a) collecting and reviewing daily core tasks of a scientist, (b) establishing their consequential requirements for a KG-based system, (c) identifying overlaps and specificities, and their coverage in current solutions. As a result, we map necessary and desirable requirements for successful KG-based science communication, derive implications, and outline possible solutions.
“…sequence of research activities) of research articles. Others describe scholarly knowledge with linked entities such as problem, method, theory, statement [19,50], or focus on the main research findings and characteristics of research articles described in surveys with concepts such as problems, approaches, implementations, and evaluations [40,106].…”
Current science communication has a number of drawbacks and bottlenecks which have been subject of discussion lately: Among others, the rising number of published articles makes it nearly impossible to get a full overview of the state of the art in a certain field, or reproducibility is hampered by fixed-length, document-based publications which normally cannot cover all details of a research work. Recently, several initiatives have proposed knowledge graphs (KG) for organising scientific information as a solution to many of the current issues. The focus of these proposals is, however, usually restricted to very specific use cases. In this paper, we aim to transcend this limited perspective and present a comprehensive analysis of requirements for an Open Research Knowledge Graph (ORKG) by (a) collecting and reviewing daily core tasks of a scientist, (b) establishing their consequential requirements for a KG-based system, (c) identifying overlaps and specificities, and their coverage in current solutions. As a result, we map necessary and desirable requirements for successful KG-based science communication, derive implications, and outline possible solutions.
“…sequence of research activities) aspects and elements of research articles. Others describe scholarly knowledge with interlinked entities such as problem, method, theory, statement [32,15], or focus on the main research findings and characteristics of research articles described in surveys with concepts such as problems, approaches, implementations, and evaluations [25,64].…”
Section: Scientific Ontologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For instance, the annotation schemes for scientific corpora (see Section 2.3) have a rather low granularity, as they do not have more than 10 classes and 10 relation types. In contrast, various ontologies (e.g [32,54]) with more than 20-35 classes and over 20-70 relations and properties are fine-grained and have a relatively high granularity. 3.…”
Section: Automatic Curationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, initiatives have promoted the usage of KGs in science communication, but on a deeper, semantic level [4,32,54,48,37,51]. They envision the transformation of the dominant document-centred knowledge exchange to knowledge-based information flows by representing and expressing knowledge through semantically rich, interlinked KGs.…”
Current science communication has a number of drawbacks and bottlenecks which have been subject of discussion lately: Among others, the rising number of published articles makes it nearly impossible to get an overview of the state of the art in a certain field, or reproducibility is hampered by fixedlength, document-based publications which normally cannot cover all details of a research work. Recently, several initiatives have proposed knowledge graphs (KGs) for organising scientific information as a solution to many of the current issues. The focus of these proposals is, however, usually restricted to very specific use cases. In this paper, we aim to transcend this limited perspective by presenting a comprehensive analysis of requirements for an Open Research Knowledge Graph (ORKG) by (a) collecting daily core tasks of a scientist, (b) establishing their consequential requirements for a KG-based system, (c) identifying overlaps and specificities, and their coverage in current solutions. As a result, we map necessary and desirable requirements for successful KG-based science communication, derive implications and outline possible solutions.
“…Information processing analyses lead one to predict that differences in communication practices across fields should diminish over time. Hars (1999) has developed an information processing analysis of corpuses of scientific preprints. He comments: My argument is generic and should apply to any scientific discipline.…”
Section: Controversies About Communication Via Unrefereed Manuscriptsmentioning
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
