SPNHC-TDWG2018 Symposium - Challenges Implementing Collections Data Quality Feedback

From iDigBio
Revision as of 15:34, 9 August 2018 by Dpaul (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search

This is a half-day symposium at the SPNHC-TDWG2018 joint meeting in Dunedin, New Zealand at the Otago Museum and the University of Otago. Official Conference Website

NOTE: session times provided in NZST and EDT. Please be aware the time differences result in our symposium being on Wednesday in the USA but Thursday in New Zealand.

General Information

Full title: Challenges Implementing Collections Data Quality Feedback: synthesizing the community experience
When: Thursday, August 30, 2018 2 - 5 PM NZST (NOTE that's Wednesday August 29th 10PM - 1 AM EDT)
Where: SPNHC-TDWG 2018 first joint meeting in Dunedin, New Zealand
Organizers Deborah Paul (iDigBio) and Nicole Fisher(CSIRO)
Contact: dpaul AT fsu DOT edu or nicole DOT fisher AT csiro DOT au
Remote Access: To Be Announced

BISS Symposium Abstract (brief version shared here): Much data quality (DQ) feedback is now available to data providers from aggregators of collections specimen and related data. Similarly, transcription centres and crowdsourcing platforms also provide data that must be assessed and often manipulated before uploading to a local database and subsequently published with aggregators. In order to facilitate broader DQ information use aggregators (GBIF, ALA, iDigBio, VertNet) and others, through the TDWG BDQ Interest Group, are harmonizing the DQ information provided - transforming part of the DQ feedback process. But, collections sharing data face challenges when trying to evaluate and integrate the information changes offered (by aggregators) for given records in local collection management systems and collection databases. Sharing DQ integration experiences can help reveal risks and opportunities. Discovering others have the same conundrums helps develop a community of belonging and may assist in removing duplication of effort. It is important to leverage the knowledge and experience of those who are currently validating data to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the process. Documenting and classifying these challenges also facilitates motivation and community building by informing those who would tackle these challenges. In this case, talks from aggregators and data providers give all of us a chance to learn from their stories about implementing and integrating DQ feedback.

Just prior to our symposium, we're hosting a SPNHC Special Interest Group (SIG) Meeting to get the DQ feedback conversation started with all participants present and remote! You can find us in room: Burns 7 (88) if you are in Dunedin with us.

When: 12:30 - 2 PM NZST on Thursday August 30th, which is 8:30 - 11:00 PM EDT Wednesday August 29th

Order Time Title Presenter, Affiliation
LUNHC - Special Interest Group (SIG) Meeting: Challenges Implementing Collections Data Quality Feedback
12:30-14:00 NZST 30 Aug

20:30 - 23:00 EDT 29 Aug

SIG - Challenges For Implementing Collections Data Quality Feedback: Synthesizing the community experience
Abstract: https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.2.26003
Deborah Paul (iDigBio / Florida State University), Nicole Fisher (CSIRO)
Challenges Implementing Collections Data Quality Feedback
1 14:00-14:20 NZST 30 Aug

22:00-22:20 EDT 29 Aug

Challenges For Implementing Collections Data Quality Feedback: synthesizing the community experience
Abstract: https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.2.26003
Deborah Paul, Florida State University, Nicole Fisher, CSIRO
2 14:20-14:40 NZST 30 Aug

22:20-22:40 EDT 29 Aug

Data Quality – Whose responsibility is it?
Abstract: https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.2.26084
Arthur D Chapman, Australian Biodiversity Information Services, Ballan, Australia
3 14:40-15:00 NZST 30 Aug

22:40-23:00 EDT 29 Aug

Integrating Data Quality Feedback: a Data Provider’s Perspective
Abstract: https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.2.26007
Maire Nazaire, Rancho Santa Ana Botanic Gardens
4 15:00-15:20 NZST 30 Aug

23:00-23:20 EDT 29 Aug

Label Transcript is Done – Now what do we do with that Data?
Abstract: https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.2.27055
Robert W. N. Cubey, Elspeth Margaret Haston, Sally King, all at Royal Botanic Gardens Edinburgh (RBGE)
15:30-16:00 NZST 30 Aug

23:30-24:00 EDT 29 Aug

5 16:00-16:20 NZST 30 Aug

midnight-0:20 EDT 30 Aug

Practical use of aggregator data quality metrics in a collection scenario
Abstract: https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.2.25970
Andrew Bentley, University of Kansas Biodiversity Institute / Specify
6 16:20-16:40 NZST 30 Aug

0:20 - 0:40 EDT 30 Aug

Who Has Time for Biological Collections Data Quality Feedback? Maybe a Community Can Help
Abstract: https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.2.26083
Teresa Jegelewicz Mayfield, Museum of Southwestern Biology
7 4:40-5:00 NZST 30 Aug

0:40 - 1:00 EDT 30 Aug

Repatriation of Augmented Information to an Institutional Database
Abstract: https://doi.org/10.3897/biss.2.26479
Sharon Grant, Janeen Jones, Kate Webbink, Rob Zschernitz, all at the Field Museum


Mesibov R (2018) An audit of some processing effects in aggregated occurrence records. ZooKeys 751: 129–146. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.751.24791
Belbin L, Daly J, Hirsch T, Hobern D, LaSalle J (2013) A specialist’s audit of aggregated occurrence records: An ‘aggregator’s’ perspective. ZooKeys 305: 67-76. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.305.5438
Nicholls M (2011) ALA Guide to Data Quality. Atlas of Living Australia. [ALA-Quality-Guide-v1_2.pdf pdf]