In the paper " Validator open access policies," Reme Melero (CSIC) presented Melibea tool (as Dulcinea tool , is named after a character in English literature, in clear analogy to the tools Sherpa-Romeo and Juliet Sherpa-).
Melibea is a directory and a validator open access policy. As a directory of open access policy seeks to institutional policies and analyzes the terms expressed in them. And validator, calculate the percentage of OA institutional policy. The institution that obtains at the moment, the highest note is the National Institute of Health (NIH ). Unlike Sherpa
-Juliet and Roarmap , Melibea difference between universities, project funders, research institutions and government institutions. This validator locates OA policies and applies 24 questions, responses and variables which have a specific weight, the percentage is calculated validated open access.
Melibea only takes into account the policy documents, expressed in writing, and difference if a recommendation or a requirement (obligation), giving a different value. The speaker said that when comparing different policies, it was found that the models are drafted several (suggested unifying criteria, as the Finns), and although the intention of the institutions is good, at the time of shaping the role does not play . In the "frequency analysis load in large central repositories and institutional repositories ", paper presented by Luis-Millan Gonzalez, Fernanda Peset, Antonia Ferrer and Rafael Aleixandre (UPV-UV) using a tool similar to Melibea ROAR. This paper presents the results of statistical analysis of 50 repositories, data comparing 2008 with 2009, to determine the frequency of their burden. At the study's authors called attention to the loading frequency is every 50 days, which is not a continuum, and that affects users in that they have to refresh your searches every 2 months.
Other communication in which tools are also used Melibea equivalent is the presented by Paul de Castro (CSIC), "Are our repositories strong enough to take on institutional mandates? . " The speaker explained that in the international open access policies, no studies on teams that manage the repositories. Hence the question of whether the repository will be able to take these mandates. Among the teams surveyed (15 in Spain consolidated repositories) gives interesting facts as IT staff is small, the teams that manage are made on average between 5 and 6 people, and most tend to the automation of processes in the repository. Concerned that the perception general it is not necessary a strong team for the creation and maintenance of a repository, and as noted by the rapporteur, with the implementation of institutional mandates, the burden of repositories increase. What if human and technological resources of institutional repositories are insufficient? Superman will not come to our aid. Ortiz Grelda
0 comments:
Post a Comment