Cyberinfrastructure for e-Science

By Tony (Anthony) John Grenville Hey, Anne E. Trefethen. Science, 2005

380 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Computer Networks and Communications, Information Systems, Information Systems and Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5d329c8f13defa7f53f6d793c18bf169ecb36199

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Computer Networks and Communications

1. Christine L. Borgman
2. Torsten Schwede
3. Natasha Noy
4. Geoffrey C. Bowker
5. John L. Markley
6. Paul N. Edwards
7. Matthew S. Mayernik
8. Roland L. Dunbrack

In Information Systems

1. Jillian C. Wallis
2. E. Rolando
3. Christine L. Borgman
4. Natasha Noy
5. Krzysztof Fidelis
6. Geoffrey C. Bowker
7. Paul N. Edwards
8. Matthew S. Mayernik

In Information Systems and Management

1. John Moult
2. Jillian C. Wallis
3. E. Rolando
4. Christine L. Borgman
5. Anneke Zuiderwijk
6. Geoffrey C. Bowker
7. John L. Markley
8. Daron M. Standley

Citations in the corpus

• Geospatial Cyberinfrastructure: Past, present and future (2010, neutral): “For example, Hey and Trefethen (2005) described how the United Kingdom’s e-science program utilized SOA to compose an e-Infrastructure or CI to support multiple science domains.”
• Biomedical ontologies: a functional perspective (2007, background): “The e-science era has brought a proliferation in both data and databases, as well as an exponential growth in published literature [1].”
• Outcome of a workshop on archiving structural models of biological macromolecules. (2006, methodology): “…Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (http://dublincore.org/) as used in part by The UK National Crystallography Service Grid Facility (Coles et al., 2006) (see http://www.ncs.chem.soton.ac.uk/) and the UK eBank Project (Hey and Trefethen, 2005) (see http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/projects/ebank-uk/schemas/).”
• Science friction: Data, metadata, and collaboration (2011, methodology): “In other words, scientific metadata provide the information necessary for investigators separated by space, time, institutions, or disciplinary norms to establish common ground (Hey and Trefethen, 2005; Jones et al., 2001; Lawrence et al., 2009; Michener, 2006; Signell et al., 2008).”
• Benefits, Adoption Barriers and Myths of Open Data and Open Government (2012, background): “Hey and Trefethen (2005) argue that an e-infrastructure can enable faster, better, and different scientific research capabilities and use of data.”
• If We Share Data, Will Anyone Use Them? Data Sharing and Reuse in the Long Tail of Science and Technology (2013, background): “Data-rich research environments can promote new fields of study, improve understanding of complex systems such as the Earth’s climate, and lead to new products such as pharmaceutical drugs [1].”
• Attention please!: learning analytics for visualization and recommendation (2011, methodology): “we agree on ways to share data sets, in an ”open science” approach [26, 9, 14].”