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.
773
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.7.1
Dataset results
773 results for “data science”
Citizen science at public libraries: Data on librarians and users perceptions of participating in a citizen science project in Catalunya, Spain
<p>As libraries struggle to keep pace with the changing societal landscape, emerging practices such as citizen science (CS) initiatives are being incorporated to reinforce the idea of public libraries as gathering, meeting, and collaboration spaces within the context of shared community and shared learning resources. However, there is little empirical evidence of whether the most open and participatory ways that CS puts forward can converge with and be nurtured by the essence of public libraries. Also, the roles of librarians and users in the ‘next generation public library’ have been under-developed. As the number of CS initiatives at public libraries grows, so does the need to collect evidence on the impact and the capacity of assimilation of CS practices. The data describes librarians and users' perceptions of participating in a citizen science project. Two hands-on activities for librarians of the Barcelona Network of Public Libraries were implemented. One was a training course for 30 librarians from 24 libraries which allowed them to envisage citizen science implementation in each library. The second activity consisted in the co-creation of a citizen social science project. 40 library users, 7 librarians from 3 different cities, and professional scientists, were involved. The data on librarians and users' perception was collected through participant observation, surveys, and a focus group to identify strengths and challenges of implementing citizen science at public libraries. The data covers librarians and users attitudes towards citizen science, their motivations to participate, their perceived ability to implement a citizen science project (as for librarians) or to contribute to science (as for library users), and the participants intention to keep engaged with citizen science, drawing on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Responses to closed-ended survey questions are analyzed at a descriptive level. The qualitative feedback from the focus group and the open-ended survey question on motivations is subjected to a thematic analysis. The data offers interesting insights to identify opportunities and challenges of implementing citizen science at public libraries, contributing to the debate over the public library's mission as local community hub.</p> <p>The dataset is formed by 5 tables:</p> <ol> <li>Librarians_pre.csv: data on librarians profiles, attitudes towards citizen science, expected impact of the project and self-efficacy collected at the beginning of the Citizen Science Lab.</li> <li>Librarians_post.csv: data on librarians profiles, attitudes towards citizen science, perceived impact of the project and self-efficacy collected at the end of the Citizen Science Lab.</li> <li>Users_first_phase.csv: data on users profiles, motivation, attitudes towards the library, confidence to perform scientific tasks and self-efficacy collected at the beginning of the Science and Citizen Action.</li> <li>Users_second_phase.csv: data on users profiles and motivation collected at the middle of the Science and Citizen Action.</li> <li>Users_last_phase.csv: data on users profiles, attitudes towards the library, confidence to perform scientific tasks and perceived impact of the project collected at the end of the Science and Citizen Action.</li> </ol> <p><strong>Citizen Science Lab Questionnaire (Librarians_pre)</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Personal information</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>1. [rol_1] What is your role at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Director</li> <li>Library technician</li> <li>Support technician</li> <li>Service support</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>2. [years_1] How long have you been working at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>2 or less</li> <li>3 to 5 years</li> <li>6 to 10 years</li> <li>11 to 20 years</li> <li>more than 20 years</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [back_1] Do you have a scientific background?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>4. [know_1] Have you already heard about citizen science?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>5. [part_1] Have you already participated in a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Attitudes towards users engagement</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>6. [att_lib_pre1] Do you believe that library users are able to participate in a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>7. [att_lib_pre2] Do you believe that library users will commit to participating in a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Expected impacts</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>8. [exp_lib_pre] To what extent do you believe that citizen science may bring positive impacts to your library?</p> <p> </p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Self-efficacy</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>9. [se_lib_pre1] Right now, do you feel able to recommend any citizen science project to library users?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>10. [se_lib_pre2] Right now, do you feel able to implement yourself and lead a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Citizen Science Lab Questionnaire (Librarians_post)</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Personal information</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>1. [years_2] How long have you been working at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>2 or less</li> <li>3 to 5 years</li> <li>6 to 10 years</li> <li>11 to 20 years</li> <li>more than 20 years</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>2. [back_2] Do you have a scientific background?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [sat_1] To what extent does the project meet your initial expectations?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Attitudes towards users engagement</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>4. [att_lib_post1] Do you believe that library users will commit to participating in a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>5. [att_lib_post2] What are/could be the potential barriers to users engagement in citizen science?</p> </td> <td> <p>[open]</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Perceived impact</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>6. [imp_lib] What do you believe that citizen science may bring to public libraries and users?</p> <p>1 [Not at all] …… 5 [Totally]</p> <p> </p> </td> <td> <p>a. Knowledge of the scientific process</p> <p>b. New connections among participants </p> <p>c. Fun</p> <p>d. New knowledge of the local environment</p> <p>e. Scientific evidence on a common concern</p> <p>f. Social cohesion</p> <p>g. Positive attitudes towards science</p> <p>h. Willingness to learn</p> <p>i. Critical thinking and self-efficacy</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Self-efficacy</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>8. [se_lib_post1] Right now, do you feel able to recommend any citizen science project to library users?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>9. [se_lib_post2] Right now, do you feel able to implement yourself and lead a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Intention to keep engaged</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>10. [eng_lib] To what extent are you motivated to keep engaged with citizen science?</p> <p> </p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p> <p><strong>Science and Citizens Action Focus group guide (Librarians)</strong></p> <p><strong>Opening questions</strong></p> <p><strong>1.</strong> To start with…. Are you satisfied with the project?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> Yes, no, why? Was it fun/interesting/challenging/enriching….</p> <p><strong>2.</strong> Do you feel you have learned something new?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> About your library’s environment, users, science and citizen science... Is there anything special that you will take with you after the project?</p> <p><strong>Reflections on the cocreation process</strong></p> <p><strong>3.</strong> At what time during the project have you felt most comfortable?</p> <p><strong>Probe:</strong> For example, has it been easier to lead the activity and/or involve and retain the community? Did you find it entertaining?</p> <p><strong>4.</strong> At what time during the project have you felt less at ease?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> What was challenging during the cocreation process?</p> <p><strong>5.</strong> To what extent do you feel more capable of implementing and leading a citizen science project in your library right now?</p> <p><strong>Probe: </strong>For example, in the case of both more crowdsourcing and of cocreated projects that actively involve the community</p> <p><strong>Reflections on the perceived impact</strong></p> <p><strong>6. </strong>To what extent does the project meet your initial expectations?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> in line with what you discussed at the beginning of the project, you expected it to promote participation, new connections among participants, improve the library perceptions and stimulate the participants’ critical thinking...Do you think that citizen science may meet these expectations?</p> <p><strong>Reflections on citizen science at public libraries</strong></p> <p><strong>7.</strong> To what extent can citizen science (in its most ‘extreme’ form of participation) be imagined as an activity within the library that promotes more active user participation?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> Through for example cocreation, experimentation, and hands-on learning activities...</p> <p><strong>8. </strong>Do you think that the activity has brought new knowledge? What new knowledge has the activity brought from your perspective?</p> <p><strong>Probe</strong><strong>:</strong> Knowledge of the scientific process, knowledge of the community or new users...</p> <p>9. What could be the opportunities and barriers of introducing citizen science at public libraries? And the barriers?</p> <p><strong>Probe:</strong> Like for example improving the perception of the library, actively involving certain users...What could be the ‘return’ for the community? What impact can citizen science projects have on making the environment more dynamic from libraries?</p> <p><strong>10. </strong>More generally, what could be the ‘added value’ of the introduction of citizen science within the library’s range of activities?</p> <p><strong>Probe:</strong> Is it a fun activity that promotes socialization, for example? Or that allows to generate new knowledge? Or that highlights the library’s social value? Or, also, that may offer new uses and new roles to the library? Can it foster a sense of community with the library as a connector? What other impacts can be generated in your environment?</p> <p><strong>Closing</strong></p> <p><strong>11.</strong> Do you see yourselves the next year, implementing a citizen science project as part of the library’s range of activities? And adopting an existing one?</p> <p><strong>Probe: </strong>Are you motivated to get more involved with citizen science projects? What kind of projects? What level of user involvement do you expect? What barriers do you see to users’ involvement? What benefits and opportunities do you think you can bring to the library?</p> <p><strong>12.</strong> We have now reached the end of the discussion. Anyone want to add anything else?</p> <p><strong>Science and Citizens Action Questionnaire (Users_first_phase)</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Personal information</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>1. [gen_1] Are you..?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Woman</li> <li>Man</li> <li>NA</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>2. [years_3] How old are you?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>18-25</li> <li>26-35</li> <li>36-45</li> <li>46-55</li> <li>56-65</li> <li>66+</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [rol_2] What is your role at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Library user not associated with local associations</li> <li>Library technician</li> <li>Member of a local association</li> <li>Representative of public administrations</li> <li>Representative of the private sector</li> <li>Others:</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>4. [back_3] Do you have a scientific background?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>5. [part_2] Have you already participated in a citizen science project?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Motivations to participate</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>6. [mot_us] What did motivate you to participate in the project?</p> </td> <td> <p>[open]</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Attitudes towards the library</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>7. [att_us_pre1] To what extent do you believe that your library is responsive to the community needs?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>8. [att_us_pre2] To what extent to you believe your library is able to face local challenges based on users' active participation?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Confidence to perform scientific tasks</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>9. [conf_us_pre] To what extent do you feel able to contribute to perform the following scientific tasks:</p> <p>1 [Not at all] …… 4 [Totally]</p> </td> <td> <p>a. Formulate the research question</p> <p>b. Data collection</p> <p>c. Analysis and interpretation of the results</p> <p>d. Propose concrete actions based on scientific evidence</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Self-efficacy</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>10. [se_us_pre] To what extent do you feel able to positively contribute to the library and your community?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Science and Citizens Action Questionnaire (Users_second_phase)</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Personal information</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>1. [gen_3] Are you..?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Woman</li> <li>Man</li> <li>NA</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>2. [years_5] How old are you?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>18-25</li> <li>26-35</li> <li>36-45</li> <li>46-55</li> <li>56-65</li> <li>66+</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [rol_4] What is your role at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Library user or technician not associated with local associations</li> <li>Member of a local association</li> <li>Representative of public administrations</li> <li>Representative of the private sector</li> <li>Others:</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [back_5] Do you have a scientific background?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>4. [mot_us2] To what extent are you motivated to carry out the experiment?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p><strong>Science and Citizens Action Questionnaire (Users_last_phase)</strong></p> <table> <tbody> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Personal information</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>1. [gen_2] Are you..?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Woman</li> <li>Man</li> <li>NA</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>2. [years_4] How old are you?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>18-25</li> <li>26-35</li> <li>36-45</li> <li>46-55</li> <li>56-65</li> <li>66+</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [rol_3] What is your role at the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Library user or technician not associated with local associations</li> <li>Member of a local association</li> <li>Representative of public administrations</li> <li>Representative of the private sector</li> <li>Others:</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>3. [back_4] Do you have a scientific background?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>Yes</li> <li>No</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>4. [part_3] To how many cocreation sessions have you participated?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>None</li> <li>1</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>5. [sat_2] To what extent are you satisfied with the experiment?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Attitudes towards the library</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>6. [att_us_post] To what extent do you believe that the project has positively changed your perception of the library?</p> </td> <td> <ul> <li>1 [Not at all]</li> <li>2</li> <li>3</li> <li>4</li> <li>5 [Totally]</li> </ul> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Confidence to perform scientific tasks</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>7. [conf_us_post] To what extent do you feel able to contribute to perform the following scientific tasks:</p> <p>1 [Not at all] …… 5 [Totally]</p> </td> <td> <p>a. Formulate the research question</p> <p>b. Data collection</p> <p>c. Analysis and interpretation of the results</p> <p>d. Propose concrete actions based on scientific evidence</p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p><strong>Perceived impact</strong></p> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <p>8. [imp_us] What do you believe that citizen science may bring to public libraries and users?</p> <p>1 [Not at all] …… 5 [Totally]</p> <p> </p> </td> <td> <p>a. Knowledge of the scientific process</p> <p>b. New connections among participants </p> <p>c. Fun</p> <p>d. New knowledge of the local environment</p> <p>e. Scientific evidence on a common concern</p> <p>f. Social cohesion</p> <p>g. Positive attitudes towards science</p> <p>h. Willingness to learn</p> <p>i. Critical thinking and self-efficacy</p> </td> </tr> </tbody> </table> <p> </p>
Using convolutional neural networks to efficiently extract immense phenological data from community science images
<p>Community science image libraries offer a massive, but largely untapped, source of observational data for phenological research. The iNaturalist platform offers a particularly rich archive, containing more than 49 million verifiable, georeferenced, open access images, encompassing seven continents and over 278,000 species. A critical limitation preventing scientists from taking full advantage of this rich data source is labor. Each image must be manually inspected and categorized by phenophase, which is both time-intensive and costly. Consequently, researchers may only be able to use a subset of the total number of images available in the database. While iNaturalist has the potential to yield enough data for high-resolution and spatially extensive studies, it requires more efficient tools for phenological data extraction. A promising solution is automation of the image annotation process using deep learning. Recent innovations in deep learning have made these open-source tools accessible to a general research audience. However, it is unknown whether deep learning tools can accurately and efficiently annotate phenophases in community science images. Here, we train a convolutional neural network (CNN) to annotate images of Alliaria petiolata into distinct phenophases from iNaturalist and compare the performance of the model with non-expert human annotators. We demonstrate that researchers can successfully employ deep learning techniques to extract phenological information from community science images. A CNN classified two-stage phenology (flowering and non-flowering) with 95.9% accuracy and classified four-stage phenology (vegetative, budding, flowering, and fruiting) with 86.4% accuracy. The overall accuracy of the CNN did not differ from humans (p = 0.383), although performance varied across phenophases. We found that a primary challenge of using deep learning for image annotation was not related to the model itself, but instead in the quality of the community science images. Up to 4% of A. petiolata images in iNaturalist were taken from an improper distance, were physically manipulated, or were digitally altered, which limited both human and machine annotators in accurately classifying phenology. Thus, we provide a list of photography guidelines that could be included in community science platforms to inform community scientists in the best practices for creating images that facilitate phenological analysis.</p>
"Python for Data Science" (AY250; UC Berkeley) Data files
<p>Data files for "Python for Data Science" (AY250; UC Berkeley)</p> <ul> <li><a href="https://zenodo.org/api/files/796932a4-1a76-4467-a66e-ac0d47e029c7/homework1_data.tgz">homework1_data.tgz </a>- Data for HW1</li> </ul> <p>Course website: https://github.com/profjsb/python-seminar</p>
Quantitative raw data for D1.3 - "Requirements and motivations of quadruple helix stakeholders for active engagement in the Citizen Science"
<p>This dataset presents the quantitative raw data that was collected under the H2020 INCENTIVE project for the D1.3 - “Requirements and motivations of quadruple helix stakeholders for active engagement in the Citizen Science Hubs”. The dataset includes the answers that were provided by almost 2,000 participants from 4 pilot European countries (Greece, Lithuania, Spain, and the Netherlands) regarding the general public's perceptions, attitudes, concerns, motivational factors and obstacles with regard to participation in Citizen Science activities. The original survey questionnaire was created and disseminated through the EUSurvey platform, and data collection took place from April to June 2021. For the statistical analysis of the data and the conclusions drawn from the analysis, you can access the D1.3 - "Requirements and motivations of quadruple helix stakeholders for active engagement in the Citizen Science Hubs”.</p> <p>Under INCENTIVE, four Citizen Science Hubs will be established and tested during the life-span of the project in the facilities of four Research Performing and Funding Organisations (RPFOs): University of Twente (the Netherlands), Autonomous University of Barcelona (Spain), Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (Greece) and Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (Lithuania). Essentially, the Hubs will aim to bring different stakeholders together and bridge society with science under the emerging paradigm of Citizen Science, in an institutionalised way.</p>
Airline Satisfaction Survey Data: Data Science for Business with Python
<p>Companion dataset for the textbook entitled "Data Science for Business with Python"</p>
Data supporting "Large-scale citizen science programs can support ecological and climate change assessments"
<p>Text file of phenology observations pulled from the USA National Phenology Network's database (www.usanpn.org) and used in this analysis. </p>
Data and code repository for Science Advances submission: Uncovering the biological basis of control energy: structural and metabolic correlates of energy inefficiency in temporal lobe epilepsy
<p>Data and codes related to the findings reported in the manuscript, "Uncovering the biological basis of control energy: structural and metabolic correlates of energy inefficiency in temporal lobe epilepsy", are deposited. Please refer to the notes located within each folder for further descriptions.</p>
Model output and PTt marker data for van Agtmaal et al., 2022 (in review), Frontiers in Earth Science
<p>Model output for reproduction of key figures in the manuscript van Agtmaal et al. titled "Quantifying continental collision dynamics for Alpine-style orogens" currently under revision in Frontiers in Earth Science</p>
Supplemental data for: Variations in the naming of malondialdehyde (MDA) in PubMed-, Scopus-, and Web of Science-indexed literature
<p>Three scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (WoS)) were consulted (July 14, 2022) to assess the frequency of eight nomenclatural forms of malondialdehyde (MDA). Due to the peculiarities of the search interface of the selected databases, PubMed was searched in the Title and Abstract fields (search query example in PubMed: "malone dialdehyde"[Title/Abstract]), Scopus was searched in the Title, Abstract, and Keywords fields (search query example in Scopus: TITLE-ABS-KEY (“malone dialdehyde”)), and WoS Core Collection was searched in the Title, Abstract, Author keywords, and Keywords Plus fields (search query example in WoS Core Collection: TS=(“malone dialdehyde”)). All types of publications for the years 2002-2021 are taken into account.</p>
Illustrations from the Environmental Data Science Book: Shared under CC-BY 4.0 for reuse
<p>Illustrations as part of the <em>Environmental Data Science</em> book.</p> <p>When using any of the images, please include the following attribution with the specific DOI as listed on the particular Zenodo page:</p> <blockquote> <p>This illustration is created by Scriberia with The Turing Way community. Used under a CC-BY 4.0 licence. DOI: <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7030142">10.5281/zenodo.7030142</a></p> </blockquote> <p>When using any of the images, please include the following attribution with the specific DOI as listed on the particular Zenodo page:</p> <p>You can cite all versions by using the DOI <a href="https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7030142">10.5281/zenodo.7030142</a>. This DOI represents all versions, and will always resolve to the latest one.</p> <p><em>This work was supported by Wave 1 of The UKRI Strategic Priorities Fund under the EPSRC Grant EP/W006022/1, particularly the Environment & Sustainability theme within that grant & The Alan Turing Institute.</em></p>
Science through ML: Post-storm Cooling Data and Programs
<p>These programs and data are associated with the AGU Space Weather Journal article "Science through Machine Learning: Quantification of Post-storm Thermospheric Cooling".</p>
A Survey of Electron Conics at Jupiter Utilizing the JADE-E Data During Science Orbits 01, 03-30
<p>This dataset provides Figure 1 from the AGU <em>JGR: Space Physics</em> article of the same name as a PNG image. It also includes text files with the data to reproduce Figures 2-13 in the same AGU <em>JGR:Space Physics</em> article.</p> <p><strong>Key Points:</strong></p> <ol> <li>We surveyed the JADE-E data for science orbits 01, 03-30 and found upward, downward, and bidirectional electron conics 2.5% of the time</li> <li>We observed all electron conics to occur most often at altitudes of 0.3-0.4 R<sub>J</sub> and local times of 15-16h</li> <li>We observed all electron conic types to have energies greater than 0.7 keV below an altitude of 0.5 R<sub>J</sub> and over the main auroral region</li> </ol> <p><strong>Abstract</strong></p> <p>We present a survey of electron conics over Jupiter’s high latitude regions utilizing 22.6 hours of data from the Jovian Auroral Distribution Experiment electron (JADE-E) instrument aboard NASA’s Juno spacecraft during science orbits 01 and 03-30. We observed electron conics for about 2.5% of this time and characterized them into three types based on their direction of motion along Jupiter’s magnetic field lines: upward, downward, and bidirectional. We observed the upward electron conics most often and at energies of 0.057-80.1 keV, while we observed the downward electron conics least often and at energies of 0.073-1.2 keV. We observed bidirectional electron conics mostly around the same times and places as the upward electron conics having energies of 0.081-49.6 keV. We observed all electron conic types to occur mostly at altitudes 0.3-0.4 R<sub>J</sub> and local times 15-16h. Furthermore, we observed all electron conic types to have energies greater than 0.7 keV below an altitude of 0.5 R<sub>J</sub> and over the main auroral region.</p> <p> </p>
Real operating data of a photovoltaic system installed at Area Science Park - Trieste - Italy
<p>Data collected from a monocrystalline silicon photovoltaic (PV) plant installed on building Q2 at Area Science Park in the Basovizza campus located in Trieste, Italy. The data represent almost 9 years of real operating conditions of the PV plant. Every 15 minutes the DC side electrical PV system working parameters were recorded, in addition also ambient temperature, irradiance in the plane of the modules and panel temperatures were recorded. Data are periodically downloaded using a control software.</p>
Data for: Image-based evaluation of beers at an online Pint of Science festival using Projective Mapping, Check-All-That-Apply and Acceptability
<p>Data obtained from n=67 untrained attendants at an outreach Pint of Science festival, online because of the COVID-19 pandemic but usually held at bars. The participants used images of brand logos to evaluate eight beers among the most commonly consumed in Spain. Three sensory analysis techniques were used: Projective Mapping, Acceptability and Check-All-That-Apply (CATA).</p>
Data from: Open access levels: a quantitative exploration using Web of Science and oaDOI data
<p>This is the raw data behind the publication (on PeerJ Preprints):</p> <p><strong>Open access levels: a quantitative exploration using Web of Science and oaDOI data</strong></p> <p>Across the world there is growing interest in open access publishing among researchers, institutions, funders and publishers alike. It is assumed that open access levels are growing, but hitherto the exact levels and patterns of open access have been hard to determine and detailed quantitative studies are scarce. Using newly available open access status data from oaDOI in Web of Science we are now able to explore year-on-year open access levels across research fields, languages, countries, institutions, funders and topics, and try to relate the resulting patterns to disciplinary, national and institutional contexts. With data from the oaDOI API we also look at the detailed breakdown of open access by types of gold open access (pure gold, hybrid and bronze), using universities in the Netherlands as an example. There is huge diversity in open access levels on all dimensions, with unexpected levels for e.g. Portuguese as language, Astronomy & Astrophysics as research field, countries like Tanzania, Peru and Latvia, and Zika as topic. We explore methodological issues and offer suggestions to improve conditions for tracking open access status of research output. Finally, we suggest potential future applications for research and policy development. We have shared all data and code openly.</p>
Figure S1 in Capelin beach spawning diaries: an analysis of 30 years of citizen science data from the island of Newfoundland, Canada
Figure S1. – Histograms of permutation test statistics testing the null hypothesis that the timing of first day of spawning was random amongst the three NAFO divisions (3KLPs). A) First day of spawning in Div. 3Ps was significantly earlier than in Div. 3L (two-tailed permutation test statistic: p = 0.0005) and B) Div. 3K (two-tailed permutation test statistic: p = 0.0005). C) There was no significant difference in first spawning day between Div. 3L and Div. 3K (two-tailed permutation test statistic: p = 0.588). The vertical line in each panel is the original test statistic.
Figure 1. – The 56 in Capelin beach spawning diaries: an analysis of 30 years of citizen science data from the island of Newfoundland, Canada
Figure 1. – The 56 capelin spawning beaches (red dots) that were monitored as part of the citizen science capelin spawning diary program along the southeastern and eastern coasts of Newfoundland, Canada (NAFO Divs. 3KLPs) for the years 1991-2021. FB (Fortune Bay), WB (White Bay), SPM (St. Pierre and Miquelon). There are four capelin stocks in the Northwest Atlantic: NAFO Divs. 2J3KL, NAFO Div. 3Ps, NAFO Div. 4RST, NAFO Divs. 3NO. Grey contours are 100 m and dark grey contours are 500 m bathymetry.
FIGURE 8 in An analysis of fossil identification guides to improve data reporting in citizen science programs
FIGURE 8. Cluster analyses of all subjects as individuals. Subject labels denote which field guide the subject tested, a red 'C' for color photos, a black 'G' for grayscale photos, and a blue 'I' for illustrations. Author names are abbreviated "DaBu" for Dava Butler, "DoEs" for Donald Esker and "KrJu" for Kristopher Juntunen.
FIGURE 1 in An analysis of fossil identification guides to improve data reporting in citizen science programs
FIGURE 1. Map of the United States and surrounding regions, showing the location of the state of Florida and FMMS (Google 2017). 1B: Geologic map of the State of Florida, showing the geographic distribution of rocks and the location of the FMMS (Google 2017; Scott et al. 2001). 1C: Geologic map of the region around the FMMS, showing the distribution of rocks and location of the site (Google 2017; Scott et al. 2001). 1D: Photograph of FMMS, taken by Fred Mazza.
BRAIN Journal-Personality Questionnaires as a Basis for Improvement of University Courses in Applied Computer Science and Informatics-Figure 5. Hierarchical clustering by scores across the EPQ–R scales for data about all the participants
<p>The clusters were generated using an implementation of a hierarchical clustering algorithm available in the R environment (R, n.d.). The top three clusters were extracted from a hierarchical cluster tree shown in Figure 5, while the color of data points in the visualization shown in figure 4 was determined based on cluster labels. Hierarchical clusters could be used when investigating which students in the analyzed sample share similar personality traits. This could be especially useful for smaller student groups as the teacher may manually inspect the cluster tree and its leaves, which designate individual students. For instance, there are three students in cluster 3, who are represented within the tree in Figure 5 by identifiers 14, 22, and 24. The students with identifiers 14 and 22 are more closely linked and more similar to each other than to the student with identifier 24. </p>
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.