Archive

Archive for the ‘Data Science’ Category

TWC at AGU FM 2018

January 22nd, 2019

In 2018, AGU celebrated its centennial year. TWC had a good showing at this AGU, with 8 members attending and presenting on a number of projects.

We arrived at DC on Saturday night, to attend the DCO Virtual Reality workshop organized by Louis Kellogg and the DCO Engagement Team, where research from greater DCO community came together to present, discuss and understand how the use of VR can facilitate and improve both research and teaching. Oliver Kreylos and Louis Kellogg spent various session presenting the results of DCO VR project, which involved recreating some of the visualizations used commonly at TWC, i.e the mineral networks. For a preview of using the VR environment, check out these three tweets. Visualizing mineral networks in a VR environment has yielded some promising results, we observed interesting patterns in the networks which need to be explored and validated in the near future.

With a successful pre-AGU workshop behind us, we geared up for the main event. First thing Monday morning, was the “Predictive Analytics” poster session, which Shaunna Morrison, Fang Huang, and Marshall Ma helped me convene. The session, while low on abstracts submitted, was full of very interesting applications of analytics methods in various earth and space science domains.

Fang Huang also co-convened a VGP session on Tuesday, titled “Data Science and Geochemistry“. It was a very popular session, with 38 abstracts. Very encouraging to see divisions other than ESSI have Data Science sessions. This session also highlighted the work of many of TWC’s collaborators from the DTDI project. Kathy Fontaine convened a e-lightning session on Data policy. This new format was very successfully in drawing a large crowd to the event and enabled a great discussion on the topic. The day ended with Fang’s talk, presenting our findings about the network analysis of samples from the cerro negro volcano.

Over the next 2 days, many of TWC’s collaborators presented, but no one from TWC presented until Friday. Friday though was the busiest day for all of us from TWC. Starting with Peter Fox’s talk in the morning, Mark Parsons, Ahmed Eleish, Kathy Fontaine and Brenda Thomson all presented their work during the day. Oh yeah…and I presented too! My poster on the creation of the “Global Earth Mineral Inventory” got good feedback. Last, but definitely not the least, Peter represented the ESSI division during the AGU centennial plenary, where he talked about the future of Big Data and Artificial Intelligence in the Earth Sciences. The video of the entire plenary can be found here.

Overall, AGU18 was great, other than the talk mentioned above, multiple productive meetings and potential collaboration emerged from meeting various scientists and talking to them about their work. It was an incredible learning experience for me and the other students (for whom this was the first AGU).

As for other posters and talks I found interesting. I tweeted a lot about them during AGU. Fortunately, I did make a list of some interesting posters.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.5/10 (2 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: +1 (from 1 vote)

WebSci ’17

August 14th, 2017

The Web Science Conference was hosted by Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute this year. The Tetherless World Constellation was heavily involved in organizing the event and ensuring the conference ran smoothly.The venue for the conference was the Franklin Plaza in downtown Troy. It was a great venue, with a beautiful rooftop.

On 25th June, there were a set of workshops organized for the attendees. I was a student volunteer at the “Algorithm Mediated Online Information Access (AMOIA)” workshop. We started the day off with a set of talks. The common theme for these talks were to reduce the bias in services we use online. We then spent the next few hours in a discussion on the “Role of recommendation algorithms in online hoaxes and fake news.”

Prof. Peter Fox and Prof Deborah McGuinness, who were the Main Conference Chairs, kicked off the Conference on 26th June. Steffen Staab gave his keynote talk on “The Web We Want“.  After the keynote talk, we jumped right into a series of talks. A few topics caught my attention during each session. Venkata Rama Kiran Garimella’s talk on “The Effect of Collective Attention on Controversial Debates on Social Media” was very interesting, as was the talk on “Recommendations for groups in location-based social networks” by Fred Ayala. We ended the talks with a Panel disscussion on “The ethics of doing Web Science”. After the panel discussions, we headed to the roof for some dinner and the Web Science Poster Session. There were plenty of Posters at the session. Congrui Li and Spencer Norris from TWC presented their work at the poster session.

 

27th of June was the day of the conference I was most looking forward to, since they had a session on “Networks : Structure, Identifiers, Search”. I found all the talk presented here very fascinating and useful. Particularly the talk “Herirachichal Change Point Detection” and “Adaptive Edge Probing” by Yu Wang and Sucheta Soundarajan respectively. I plan to use the work they presented in one of my current research projects. At the end of the day on 27th June, the award for the papers and posters were presented. Helena Webb won the best paper award. She presented her work on “The ethical challenges of publishing Twitter data for research dissemination”. Venkata Garimella won the best student paper award. Tetherless’ own Spencer Norris won the best poster award.

On 28th June, we started the day of by giving a set of talks on the topic chosen for the Hackthon, “Network Analysis for Non-Social Data”. Here I presented my work on how Network Analysis techniques can be leveraged and applied in the field of Earth Science. After these talk, the hackathon presentations were made by the participants. At lunch , Ahmed Eliesh from TWC won first place in the Hackathon. After lunch, we had the last 2 sessions at WebSci ’17. In these talks, Shawn Jones’ talk present Yasmin Alnomany’s work on “Generating Stories from Archived Collections” and Helena Webb’s best paper winning talk on “The ethical challenges of publishing Twitter data for research dissemination” piqued my interest.

Overall, attending the web science conference was a very valuable experience for me. There was plenty to learn, lots of networking opportunities and a generally jovial atmosphere around the conference. Here’s Looking forward to the next year’s conference in Amsterdam.

 

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.3/10 (3 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Do we have a magic flute for K-12 Web Science?

October 27th, 2015

In early July of 2015, Tetherless World Constellation (TWC) opened its door for four young men of the 2015 summer program of Rensselaer Research Experience for High School Students. The program covered a period of four weeks and each student was asked to choose a small and focused topic for research experience. They each were also asked to prepared a poster and present it in public at the end of the program.

Web Science was the discipline chosen by the four high school students at TWC. Before their arrival several professors, research scientists and graduate students formed a mentoring group, and officially I was assigned the task to mentor two of the four students. Such a fresh experience! And then a question came up was: do we have a curriculum of Web Science for High School Students? And for a period of four weeks? We do have excellent textbooks for Semantic Web, Data Science, and more, but most of them are not for high school students. Also the ‘research centric’ feature of the summer program indicated that we should not focus only on teaching but perhaps needed to spend more time on advising a small research project.

My simple plan was, for week 1 we focused on basic concepts, for weeks 2 and 3 the students were assigned a specific topic taken from an existing project, and for week 4 we focused on result analysis, wrap up and poster preparation. A google doc was used to record the basic concepts, technical resources and assignments we introduced and discussed in week 1. I thought those materials could be a little bit more for the students, but to my surprise they took them up really fast, which gave me the confidence to assign them research topics from ongoing projects. One of the students was asked to do statistical analysis of records on the Deep Carbon Observatory Data Portal, and presented the results in interactive visualizations. The other student worked on the visualization of geologic time and connections to Web resources such as Wikipedia. Technologies used were RDF database, SPARQL query, JavaScript, D3.js and JSON data format.

Hope the short program has evoked the students’ interest to explore more and deeper in Web Science. Some of them will soon graduate from high school and go to universities. Wish them good luck!

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 10.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)

Another AGU and we all get wet from the rain in San Fran…

January 10th, 2015

The 2014 Meeting of the American Geophysical Union in the wet city of San Francisco has not yet faded from memory. Unfortunately, it may be remembered for the “year of the RFID mess” over the great science progress. However, let’s start with the positive. Rensselaer’s Tetherless World was well represented – see what we did at http://tw.rpi.edu/web/event/AGU/FM/2014/Participation = Patrick, Stephan, Marshall, Evan and Paulo (representing others including Linyun and Han) in talks, posters covering both research and project progress, and the academic booth (go RPI!). This year, we presented in Informatics (IN) and Education (ED) sessions with talks and many posters. Just on a logistics note, I was very pleased to have the exhibit hall adjoined to one of the poster halls this year. This made the task of moving between them and not missing one or the other, much easier. Hope that continues. It was another excellent year for Informatics; I’ve misplaced the stats but suffice to say increasing numbers of abstracts, great student contributions and a sea of new faces. A continuing treat is the Leptoukh Lecture (honouring Greg L, whom I still miss very much). This year, Dr. Bryan Lawrence (working in the UK, but actually a Kiwi) gave a tour de force lecture on computation and data aspects of climate science. The attendance was excellent, clearly pulling in a wide cross-section of attendees from well beyond the IN folks. Thanks Bryan. This year was the change over for Informatics leadership with Kerstin Lehnert taking over from Michael Piasecki as President – thanks Michael for your leadership and efforts over the last two years. Ruth Duerr (NSIDC) came in as President-Elect and Anne Wilson (CU/LASP) as secretary. Diversity rules in Informatics!!!

In regard to IN poster sessions, we saw an increase in the flash mob approach. What is that you ask? It is where, at an appointed time during the poster session, the session convener arranges for all poster presenters to be present. After having also advertised by twitter, email and general coercion, they gather poster attendees around each poster (in order, down the row). The presenter has 5 minutes to present their poster and then the mob moves on. It has shown to be a very effective way of engaging attendees and the presenters. If the session organiser has pre-planned it, the sequencing can also be very effective. After each has been presented, may attendees stay to quiz specific posters they were interested in. The one aspect that makes this style hard is the general noise level in the poster hall. Poster presenters need to “speak up” and project their voice: not all are prepared for that but it is very good practice!

I am author / co-author on quite a few presentations each year. This year I had two posters (both invited) as lead. You can see them via the link above. Sixth generation of data and information architectures, and Anatomy and Physiology of Data Science drew quite a lot of interest. But I must say, I did enjoy getting to stand with Mark Parsons at our poster “Why Data Citation Misses the Point” (I will add that to the website) and elaborate on our premise. Interestingly, we had a lot of agreement with the work — we’d hope to provoke arguments (!! as usual !!). Now to find time to write that up.

I want to acknowledge the excellent presentation of other works I was co-author on. The TWCers noted above are indeed skilled and knowledgeable researchers and practitioners. I know that but it is always excellent to have peers approach me to tell me that and how impressed they are with both the work and the people!

And the RFID issue – just go here and see for yourselves: http://petitions.moveon.org/sign/say-no-to-rfid-tracking.fb47

See all of you next December.

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.0/10 (1 vote cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)
Author: Categories: Data Science, Semantic Web, tetherless world Tags:

Open Science in an Open World

December 21st, 2014

I began to think about a blog for this topic after I read a few papers about Open Codes and Open Data published in Nature and Nature Geoscience in November 2014. Later on I also noticed that the editorial office of Nature Geoscience made a cluster of articles themed on Transparency in Science (http://www.nature.com/ngeo/focus/transparency-in-science/index.html), which really created an excellent context for further discussion of Open Science.

A few weeks later I attended the American Geophysical Union (AGU) Fall Meeting at San Francisco, CA. That is used to be a giant meeting with more than 20,000 attendees. My personal focus is presentations, workshops and social activities in the group of Earth and Space Science Informatics. To summarize the seven-day meeting experience with a few keywords, I would choose: Data Rescue, Open Access, Gap between Geo and Info, Semantics, Community of Practice, Bottom-up, and Linking. Putting my AGU meeting experience together with thoughts after reading the Nature and Nature Geoscience papers, now it is time for me to finish a blog.

Besides incentives for data sharing and open source policies of scholarly journals, we can extend the discussion of software and data publication, reuse, citation and attribution by shedding more light on both technological and social aspects of an environment for open science.

Open science can be considered as a socio-technical system. One part of the system is a way to track where everything goes and another is a design of appropriate incentives. The emerging technological infrastructure for data publication adopts an approach analogous to paper publication and has been facilitated by community standards for dataset description and exchange, such as DataCite (http://www.datacite.org), Open Archives Initiative-Object Reuse and Exchange (http://www.openarchives.org/ore) and the Data Catalog Vocabulary (http://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dcat). Software publication, in a simple way, may use a similar approach, which calls for community efforts on standards for code curation, description and exchange, such as the Working towards Sustainable Software for Science (http://wssspe.researchcomputing.org.uk). Simply minting Digital Object Identifiers to codes in a repository makes software publication no difference from data publication (See also: http://www.sciforge-project.org/2014/05/19/10-non-trivial-things-github-friends-can-do-for-science/) . Attention is required for code quality, metadata, license, version and derivation, as well as metrics to evaluate the value and/or impact of a software publication.

Metrics underpin the design of incentives for open science. An extended set of metrics – called altmetrics – was developed for evaluating research impact and has already been adopted by leading publishers such as Nature Publishing Group (http://www.nature.com/press_releases/article-metrics.html). Factors counted in altmetrics include how many times a publication has been viewed, discussed, saved and cited. It was very interesting to read some news about funders’ attention to altmetrics (http://www.nature.com/news/funders-drawn-to-alternative-metrics-1.16524) on my flight back from the AGU meeting – from the 12/11/2014 issue of Nature which I picked from the NPG booth at the AGU meeting exhibition hall. For a software publication the metrics might also count how often the code is run, the use of code fragments, and derivations from the code. A software citation indexing service – similar to the Data Citation Index (http://wokinfo.com//products_tools/multidisciplinary/dci/) of Thomson Reuters – can be developed to track citations among software, datasets and literature and to facilitate software search and access.

Open science would help everyone – including the authors – but it can be laborious and boring to give all the fiddly details. Fortunately fiddly details are what computers are good at. Advances in technology are enabling the categorization, identification and annotation of various entities, processes and agents in research as well as the linking and tracing among them. In our 06/2014 Nature Climate Change article we discussed the issue of provenance of global change research (http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v4/n6/full/nclimate2141.html). Those works on provenance capture and tracing further extend the scope of metrics development. Yet, incorporating those metrics in incentive design requires the science community to find an appropriate way to use them in research assessment. A recent progress is that NSF renamed Publications section as Products in the biographical sketch of funding applicants and allowed datasets and software to be listed (http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13004/nsf13004.jsp). To fully establish the technological infrastructure and incentive metrics for open science, more community efforts are still needed.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 8.5/10 (6 votes cast)
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)