Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
670
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
670 results for “review study”
FIGURE 19. A – O in Studies in Australian Katydids: A Review of the Australian Snub-nosed Sylvan katydids (Tettigoniidae; Pseudophyllinae; Simoderini)
FIGURE 19. A – O. Mastigaphoides tuberculatus Rentz, Su, Ueshima, sp nov. A, head, pronotum, holotype male. B, frons, holotype male. C, pronotum, lateral view, holotype male. D, coxal spine, female, Jepoon, Qld., E, sternal processes, holotype male. F, sternal processes, female, Jepoon, Qld., G, fore femur, holotype male. H, fore femur, female, Jepoon, Qld. I, stridulatory " blister ", male, Kuranda, Qld. J, stridulatory veins and mirror, Kuranda, Qld. K, tip of abdomen, ventral view, male, Kuranda, Qld. L, subgenital plate, holotype male. M, subgenital plate, female, Jepoon, Qld. N, egg, Kuranda, Qld. O, end of egg.
Dataset: An empirical study on self-admitted technical debt in modern code review
<pre>This data was used in the IST paper "An Empirical Study on Self-Admitted Technical Debt in Modern Code Review". The program to use this data is published in GitHub (https://github.com/Yutaro-Kashiwa/ReviewSATD_RP) When you use this data in your research, please cite the following papers: ``` @article{Kashiwa:IST:2022:SATD_Review, author = {Yutaro Kashiwa and Ryoma Nishikawa and Yasutaka Kamei and Masanari Kondo and Emad Shihab and Ryosuke Sato and Naoyasu Ubayashi}, title = {An empirical study on self-admitted technical debt in modern code review}, journal = {Information and Software Technology}, volume = {146}, pages = {106855}, year = {2022}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2022.106855}, doi = {10.1016/j.infsof.2022.106855} } ``` </pre>
Systematic review of marine environmental DNA metabarcoding studies: Toward best practices for data usability and accessibility
<p>The emerging field of environmental DNA (eDNA) research lacks universal guidelines for ensuring data produced are FAIR–findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable–despite growing awareness of the importance of such practices. In order to better understand these data usability challenges, we systematically reviewed 60 peer-reviewed articles conducting a specific subset of eDNA research: metabarcoding studies in marine environments. For each article, we characterized approximately 90 features across several categories: general article attributes and topics, methodological choices, types of metadata included, and availability and storage of sequence data. Analyzing these characteristics, we identified several barriers to data accessibility, including a lack of common context and vocabulary across the articles, missing metadata, supplementary information limitations, and a concentration of both sample collection and analysis in the United States. While some of these barriers require significant effort to address, we also found many instances where small choices made by authors and journals could have an outsized influence on the discoverability and reusability of data. Promisingly, articles also showed consistency and creativity in data storage choices as well as a strong trend toward open access publishing. Our analysis underscores the need to think critically about data accessibility and usability as marine eDNA metabarcoding studies, and eDNA projects more broadly, continue to proliferate.</p>
Dataset for the Paper: "Security Defect Detection via Code Review: A Study of the OpenStack and Qt Communities"
<p>This is the dataset for the paper: "Security Defect Detection via Code Review: A Study of the OpenStack and Qt Communities ", including the extracted data and results.</p> <p>The dataset contains the following three folders:</p> <p><strong>1. RQ1</strong>: </p> <ul> <li><strong>Security defect in Nova.xlsx</strong></li> <li><strong>Security defect in Neutron.xlsx</strong></li> <li><strong>Security defect in Qt Base.xlsx</strong></li> <li><strong>Security defect in Qt Creator.xlsx;</strong></li> </ul> <p>The RQ1 folder contains four files corresponding to the four projects (i.e., Nova and Neutron from OpenStack, Qt Base and Qt Creator from Qt), including 539 security-related review comments, in which security defects were identified by the reviewers. These instances were obtained from manual labelling after keyword-based search. The security defect type of these instances are presented to answer RQ1.</p> <p><strong>How to Read the MS Excel files in RQ1:</strong></p> <p>Each of the four MS Excel files in this folder contains 6 sheets for six years from 2017 to 2022. Each sheet has 10 columns for recoding 10 data items, among which the last four data items are used in our study to answer the RQs. We list the data items in the following table.</p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td><strong>Data Item</strong></td> <td><strong>Description</strong></td> <td><strong>Source</strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td>Keyword</td> <td>The corresponding keyword of the comment.</td> <td>Keyword-based Search</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Code_change_id</td> <td>The code_change_id of the comment.</td> <td>Gerrit</td> </tr> <tr> <td>File</td> <td>The file in which the comment is added.</td> <td>Gerrit</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Patchset</td> <td>The patchset of the comment within the code change.</td> <td>Gerrit</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Line</td> <td>The line number in the file at which the comment is added.</td> <td>Gerrit</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Message</td> <td>The text of the review comment.</td> <td>Gerrit</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Security-related</td> <td>Whether the review comment is security-related (i.e., Yes or No).</td> <td>Labelling</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Security defect type</td> <td>The type of the security defect identified in the comment.</td> <td>Labelling</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Consequence</td> <td>The Consequence of the security defect.</td> <td>Extraction</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Resolution Evidence</td> <td>The information about where the identified security defect was resolved in the code</td> <td>Extraction</td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>2. RQ2</strong>: </p> <ul> <li><strong>Extracted data for RQ2.mx22</strong></li> </ul> <p>The RQ2 folder contains the extracted data of 539 security-related review comments in <strong>Extracted data for RQ2.mx22</strong>, which was encoded and analyzed by the MAXQDA tool, investigating the treatment of security defects by developers and reviewers to answer RQ2.</p> <p><strong>3. RQ3</strong>: </p> <ul> <li><strong>Extracted data for RQ3.mx22</strong></li> </ul> <p>The RQ3 folder contains the extracted data of 161 review comments in which identified security defects were not resolved by developers in <strong>Extracted data for RQ3.mx22</strong>. which was also encoded and analyzed by the MAXQDA tool, exploring the causes of not resolving security defects to answer RQ3.</p> <p><strong>Note</strong>: The mx22 can be opened by MAXQDA 22, which are available at <a href="https://www.maxqda.com/">https://www.maxqda.com/</a> for download. You may also use the free trial version of MAXQDA 2022, which is available at <a href="https://www.maxqda.com/trial">https://www.maxqda.com/trial</a> for download.</p>
Extracted Data from Reviewed Studies for Platform Ecosystems Analytics SLR
<p>Aggregation of data extraction results as part of a systematic literature review on platform ecosystems analytics.</p>
FIGURE 63 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 63. The sclerites of Chrysogorgia pendula Versluys, 1902, specimen MBM286867. A. Sclerites in tentacle rachis. B. Sclerites in polyp body wall. C. Sclerites in pinnules. D. Some warty sclerites in polyp mouth area near the tentacles. E. Sclerites in coenenchyme. Scale bars: 300 μm (A–C and E in the same scale); 100 μm (D).
FIGURE 70 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 70. The external morphology and polyps of Chrysogorgia pendula Versluys, 1902, specimen MBM286870. A, B. The same specimen in situ and after collection. C, F. Single non-terminal polyps under a light microscope and SEM, respectively. D, E. Single terminal polyps under a light microscope and SEM, respectively. G. The inner side of tentacle under SEM. Scale bars: 5 cm (B); 1 mm (C–F); 200 μm (G).
FIGURE 67 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 67. Sclerites of Chrysogorgia pendula Versluys, 1902, specimen MBM286869. A. Sclerites in tentacle rachis. B. Sclerites in polyp body wall. C. Sclerites in coenenchyme. D. Large warty sclerites in the polyp mouth area near the tentacles. E. Sclerites in pinnules. F. Small warty sclerites in tentacles. Scale bars: 200 μm (A–C in the same scale); 100 μm (D–F; E and F in the same scale).
FIGURE 60 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 60. The external morphology and polyps of Chrysogorgia pendula Versluys, 1902, specimen MBM286359. A, C. The same specimen in situ and after collection. B, D, G. Single non-terminal polyps under a light microscope and SEM, respectively. E, F. Single terminal polyp under a light microscope and SEM, respectively. H. A part of branch under SEM. I. Basal polyp body wall under SEM. J. Tentacular part under SEM. Scale bars: 10 cm (C); 1 mm (B, D–G); 500 μm (H–J).
FIGURE 59 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 59. Sclerites of Chrysogorgia pendula Versluys, 1902, specimen MBM286866. A. Sclerites in tentacle rachis. B. Sclerites in polyp body wall. C. Sclerites in coenenchyme. D. Some warty sclerites in polyp mouth area near the tentacles. E. Sclerites in pinnules. Scale bars: 300 μm (A–C in the same scale); 200 μm (D and E in the same scale).
FIGURE 51 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 51. Sclerites of Chrysogorgia acanthella (Wright & Studer, 1889), specimen MBM286357. A. Sclerites in tentacle rachis. B. Sclerites in polyp body wall. C. Sclerites in coenenchyme. D. Some warty sclerites in polyp mouth area near the tentacles. E. Sclerites in pinnules. Scale bars: 300 μm (A–C in the same scale); 100 μm (D, E in the same scale).
FIGURE 49 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 49. The sclerites of Chrysogorgia acanthella (Wright & Studer, 1889), specimen MBM286862. A. Sclerites in tentacle rachis. B. Sclerites in polyp body wall. C. Sclerites in pinnules. D. Sclerites in coenenchyme. E. Sclerites at the base of tentacular part. F. Sclerites in polyp mouth area. Scale bars: 300 μm (A–E in the same scale); 50 μm (F).
FIGURE 52 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 52. The external morphology and polyps of Chrysogorgia pendula Versluys, 1902, specimen MBM286360. A, B. The same specimen in situ and after collection. C. Two non-terminal polyps filled with eggs under a light microscope. D, F. Single terminal polyps under a light microscope and SEM, respectively. E. A single non-terminal polyp filled with eggs under SEM. G. A part of branch under SEM. Scale bars: 5 cm (B); 1 mm (C–F); 300 μm (G).
FIGURE 48 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 48. The external morphology and polyps of Chrysogorgia acanthella (Wright & Studer, 1889), specimen MBM286862. A, B. The same specimen in situ and after collection. C, D. Single non-terminal polyps under a light microscope and SEM, respectively. E. A single terminal polyps under SEM. F. A part of branch under SEM. Scale bars: 10 cm (B); 1 mm (C–E); 300 μm (F).
FIGURE 46 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 46. The external morphology and polyps of Chrysogorgia ramificans Xu, Li, Zhan & Xu, 2019. A, B. The same specimen in situ and after collection. C, E. Single non-terminal polyps under a light microscope and SEM, respectively. D. Pinnular part under SEM. F. A single terminal polyp under SEM. G. A part of branch under SEM. Scale bars: 10 cm (B); 1 mm (C, E, F); 500 μm (G); 100 μm (D).
FIGURE 62 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 62. The external morphology and polyps of Chrysogorgia pendula Versluys, 1902, specimen MBM286867. A, B. The same specimen in situ and after collection. C. A terminal branchlet under a light microscope. D. A part of branch under SEM. E, G. Single terminal polyps under a light microscope and SEM, respectively. F. A single non-terminal polyp under a light microscope. Scale bars: 10 cm (B); 5 mm (C); 1 mm (E–G); 200 μm (D).
FIGURE 58 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 58. The external morphology and polyps of Chrysogorgia pendula Versluys, 1902, specimen MBM286866. A, B. The same specimen in situ and after collection. C. A single non-terminal polyps under a light microscope. D, E. Single terminal polyps under a light microscope and SEM, respectively. F. Basal polyp body wall under SEM. G. A part of branch under SEM. Scale bars: 10 cm (B); 1 mm (C–E); 300 μm (F, G).
FIGURE 42 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 42. The external morphology and polyps of Chrysogorgia tenuis sp. nov. A, B. The holotype in situ and after collection. C. A non-terminal polyp under a light microscope. D, E, F. Terminal polyps under a light microscope and SEM, respectively. G. A part of branch under SEM. Scale bars: 10 cm (C); 1 mm (C–F); 300 μm (G).
FIGURE 43 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 43. Sclerites of holotype of Chrysogorgia tenuis sp. nov. A. Sclerites in tentacle rachis. B. Sclerites in polyp body wall. C. Sclerites in pinnules. D. Some warty sclerites in polyp mouth area near the tentacles. E. Sclerites in coenenchyme. Scale bars: 300 μm (A–C, E in the same scale); 100 μm (D).
FIGURE 41 in Studies on western Pacific gorgonians (Anthozoa: Octocorallia, Chrysogorgiidae). Part 1: a review of the genus Chrysogorgia, with description of a new genus and three new species
FIGURE 41. Sclerites of Chrysogorgia rigida Versluys, 1902. A. Sclerites with toothed ends in pinnules. B. Sclerites with forked or sharp ends in pinnules. C. Sclerites in tentacle rachis. D. Sclerites at the base of tentacular part. E. Sclerites in the basal polyp body wall. F. Sclerites in coenenchyme. Scale bars: 300 μm (A–E in the same scale); 200 μm (F).
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.