Skip to main content
Powered by ShareScore

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.

5,805

datasets available to search

ShareScore release 0.9.0

Reset

Dataset results

5,805 results for “Data model”

Learn how ShareScore rates datasets ↗
zenodo36/100

Thermophysical properties of hydrogen mixtures relevant for the development of the hydrogen economy: Review of available experimental data and thermodynamic models

<p>File: 1-s2.0-S096014812201271X-mmc1.docx</p> <p>This file (DOCX) contains additional figures associated with the hydrogen-containing systems.</p> <p>File: 1-s2.0-S096014812201271X-mmc2.xlsx</p> <p>This file (XLSX) contains tables with the coordinates of the VLE associated with the hydrogen-containing systems.</p> <p>File: 1-s2.0-S096014812201271X-mmc3.xlsx</p> <p>This file (XLSX) contains tables with the density data associated with the hydrogen-containing systems.</p> <p>File: 1-s2.0-S096014812201271X-mmc4.xlsx</p> <p>This file (XLSX) contains tables with the calorific data associated with the hydrogen-containing systems.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>File: 2022_Renewable Energy_Manuscript_repository.docx</p> <p>This is an author-created, un-copyedited version of an article accepted for publication in Renewable Energy (2022, 198, 1398-1429). The editor of the Journal is not responsible for any errors or omissions in this version of the manuscript or any version derived from it. The definitive publisher-authenticated, Open-Access version is available online at:&nbsp;https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2022.08.096</p>

opencc-by-4.0Aug 2022View details →
zenodo36/100

Experimental raw data and numerical model

<p>Experimental raw data and numerical models for the work of Siyuan Qiang et, al., (2023), which focuses on the relationship between the saturation exponents and pore water distribution.</p> <p>Run the main.m file for numerical simulation<br>The simulation schemes could be easily changed by updating the SIG1.txt file.</p> <p>.mat file:<br>variable 'SIP':measured SIP frequency magnitude and phase (in degree) in experiments<br>variable 'Sw':measured water saturation in experiments</p>

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2023View details →
zenodo36/100

Codes, Catalogues and Data for "Deep Learning Phase Pickers: How Well Can Existing Models Detect Hydraulic-Fracturing Induced Seismicity from a Downhole Array"

<p><strong>Codes, Catalogues and Data available for:</strong>&nbsp;<br>"Deep Learning Phase Pickers: How Well Can Existing Models Detect Hydraulic-Fracturing Induced Seismicity from a Downhole Array"</p> <p><strong>Catalog</strong> folder: Contains the CMM (beam-forming based) event catalogue as well as event and station information for the PNR-1z site.</p> <p><strong>Classification Test</strong> folder: Jupyter notebooks that run the classification tests and mseed input data of isolated phases (P, S, Noise).</p> <p><strong>DL_model_catalogues</strong> folder: Contains full catalogues for each DL phase picker (GPD, U-GPD, EQT and PhaseNet) and the LinMEF-filtered catalogues.</p> <p><strong>Model_run_docs</strong> folder: Util/core files for PhaseNet and EQTransformer to read data with different sampling frequencies (i.e., not 100 Hz)</p> <p><strong>Data</strong> folder: Contains one hour of continuous downhole data (11th December 2018, 9am-10am) from the PNR-1z dataset.</p>

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2024View details →
zenodo36/100

Supplementary Material for "Investigating Software Development Teams Members' Perceptions of Data Privacy in the Use of Large Language Models (LLMs)"

<h3>ABSTRACT<strong>:&nbsp;</strong></h3> <p><strong>Context</strong>: Large Language Models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language generation and understanding. However, they raise significant data privacy concerns, especially when sensitive data is processed and stored by third parties. <br><strong>Goal</strong>: This paper investigates the perception of software development teams members regarding data privacy when using LLMs in their professional activities. Additionally, we examine the challenges faced and the practices adopted by these practitioners. <br><strong>Method</strong>: We conducted a survey with 78 ICT practitioners from five regions of the country. <br><strong>Results</strong>: Software development teams members have basic knowledge about data privacy and LGPD, but most have never received formal training on LLMs and possess only basic knowledge about them. Their main concerns include the leakage of sensitive data and the misuse of personal data. To mitigate risks, they avoid using sensitive data and implement anonymization techniques. The primary challenges practitioners face are ensuring transparency in the use of LLMs and minimizing data collection. Software development teams members consider current legislation inadequate for protecting data privacy in the context of LLM use. <br><strong>Conclusions</strong>: The results reveal a need to improve knowledge and practices related to data privacy in the context of LLM use. According to software development teams members, organizations need to invest in training, develop new tools, and adopt more robust policies to protect user data privacy. They advocate for a multifaceted approach that combines education, technology, and regulation to ensure the safe and responsible use of LLMs.</p>

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2024View details →
zenodo36/100

PREPCLIM sample data set for publication in "Geoscientific Model Development" 2024

<p>Data set illustrating the functionality of software developed in the PREPCLIM project and used in the proposed paper:</p> <p>A Modeling System for Identification of Maize Ideotypes, optimal sowing dates and nitrogen<br>fertilization under climate change &ndash; PREPCLIM-v1</p> <p>https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-2024-105<br>Preprint. Discussion started: 11 July 2024<br>c Author(s) 2024. CC BY 4.0 License.</p>

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2024View details →
zenodo36/100

Supplementary data for the Eoles model

<p>Contains several demand and production hourly profiles to be used by the Eoles model developed at CIRED</p>

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2024View details →
zenodo36/100

Fig. 2 in Phylogeography and potential glacial refugia of terrestrial gastropod Faustina faustina (Rossmässler, 1835) (Gastropoda: Eupulmonata: Helicidae) inferred from molecular data and species distribution models

Fig. 2 Haplotype distribution for nuclear markers: ITS-2 (left) and 28S rRNA (right)

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2020View details →
zenodo36/100

Supporting publication for 'Guidelines for reporting 2017 prevalence sample-based data in accordance with SSD2 data model'

<p>These two Excel documents help you to map terms from the matrix catalogue ZOO_CAT_MATRIX used in the aggregated prevalence&nbsp;data model to FoodEx2 codes and offer you examples on how prevalence data can be reported using SSD2.</p>

opencc-by-4.0Mar 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

Observation data and numerical model files for river plumes in Pallanza Bay of Lake Maggiore, Italy

<p>Data includes observation data collected from three deployments in Pallanza Bay of Lake Maggiore, Italy. Observation data includes velocity&nbsp;and thermistor chain data from deployments in 2012 and 2014, which captured a series of river plume discharges from the Toce River.&nbsp; Also included are numerical model source files and scenario files for simulations of river plumes into Pallanza Bay.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

opencc-by-4.0Apr 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

LFP Data to estimate post-synaptic potentials from local field potentials with reverse neural mass model

<p>All data used in the paper name &quot;Reconstruction of post-synaptic potentials by reverse modeling of local field potentials&quot; that is under submission at PLOS Computational Biology.</p> <p>All data are given in Matlab files (.mat) and text files (.csv)</p>

opencc-by-4.0Jun 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

Northern shoveler data for "Sensitivity of binomial N-mixture models to overdispersion: the importance of assessing model fit"

<p>Repeated count data for Northern shoveler analyzed in Knape et al. Sensitivity of binomial N-mixture models to overdispersion: the importance of assessing model fit&quot;, Methods in Ecology and Evolution.</p> <p>count.csv contains Northern shoveler counts repeated 10 times at 50 sites in a 50 x 10 matrix. Each row corresponds to a specific site and columns correspond to visits.</p> <p>date.csv is a 50 x 10 matrix containing the julian date of each count, using the same ordering of visits (columns) and sites (rows) as in count.csv.</p> <p>site.csv contains covariates for each of the 50 sites. Sites (rows) are ordered in the same way as in count.csv and date.csv. The first column represents the area of water (ha) covered by the wetlands where the counts were conducted, the second columns is the percentage of the wetland area covered by reeds, and the third column is the latitude of the wetland in RT90 coordinates.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p>

opencc-by-4.0Jul 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

Supplementary Data: Global analyses of Higgs portal singlet dark matter models using GAMBIT

<p>The files in this record contain data for the effective Higgs portal dark&nbsp;matter models considered in the&nbsp;<a href="http://gambit.hepforge.org/">GAMBIT</a>&nbsp;&quot;Higgs portal&quot; paper.</p>

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

AgMIP's Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set: LPJ-GUESS potato

<p>This is model output from LPJ-GUESS for potato as part of AgMIP&#39;s Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set.</p> <p>The data have been generated following the modeling protocol of Elliott et al. (2015) and has been used to evaluate the models (M&uuml;ller et al., 2017). A data description paper has been published in Scientific Data (M&uuml;ller et al. 2019).</p> <p>References:</p> <p>Elliott J, M&uuml;ller C, Deryng D, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Boote KJ, B&uuml;chner M, Foster I, Glotter M, Heinke J, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Mueller ND, Ray DK, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, and Sheffield J. 2015, The Global Gridded Crop Model intercomparison: data and modeling protocols for Phase 1 (v1.0). Geosci. Model Dev.&nbsp;8, 261-277, doi:10.5194/gmd-8-261-2015</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Glotter M, Hoek S, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Jones C, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Ray DK, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Song CX, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2017, Global gridded crop model evaluation: benchmarking, skills, deficiencies and implications, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1403-1422, doi: 10.5194/gmd-10-1403-2017</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Kelly D, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Hoek S, Izaurralde RC, Jones CD, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2019, The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison phase 1 simulation dataset, Scientific Data, 6, 50, doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0023-8</p>

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

AgMIP's Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set: CLM-Crop cotton

<p>This is model output from CLM-Crop for cotton as part of AgMIP&#39;s Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set.</p> <p>The data have been generated following the modeling protocol of Elliott et al. (2015) and has been used to evaluate the models (M&uuml;ller et al., 2017). A data description paper has been published in Scientific Data (M&uuml;ller et al. 2019).</p> <p>References:</p> <p>Elliott J, M&uuml;ller C, Deryng D, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Boote KJ, B&uuml;chner M, Foster I, Glotter M, Heinke J, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Mueller ND, Ray DK, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, and Sheffield J. 2015, The Global Gridded Crop Model intercomparison: data and modeling protocols for Phase 1 (v1.0). Geosci. Model Dev.&nbsp;8, 261-277, doi:10.5194/gmd-8-261-2015</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Glotter M, Hoek S, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Jones C, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Ray DK, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Song CX, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2017, Global gridded crop model evaluation: benchmarking, skills, deficiencies and implications, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1403-1422, doi: 10.5194/gmd-10-1403-2017</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Kelly D, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Hoek S, Izaurralde RC, Jones CD, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2019, The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison phase 1 simulation dataset, Scientific Data, 6, 50, doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0023-8</p>

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

AgMIP's Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set: CLM-Crop soy

<p>This is model output from CLM-Crop for soy as part of AgMIP&#39;s Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set.</p> <p>The data have been generated following the modeling protocol of Elliott et al. (2015) and has been used to evaluate the models (M&uuml;ller et al., 2017). A data description paper has been published in Scientific Data (M&uuml;ller et al. 2019).</p> <p>References:</p> <p>Elliott J, M&uuml;ller C, Deryng D, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Boote KJ, B&uuml;chner M, Foster I, Glotter M, Heinke J, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Mueller ND, Ray DK, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, and Sheffield J. 2015, The Global Gridded Crop Model intercomparison: data and modeling protocols for Phase 1 (v1.0). Geosci. Model Dev.&nbsp;8, 261-277, doi:10.5194/gmd-8-261-2015</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Glotter M, Hoek S, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Jones C, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Ray DK, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Song CX, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2017, Global gridded crop model evaluation: benchmarking, skills, deficiencies and implications, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1403-1422, doi: 10.5194/gmd-10-1403-2017</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Kelly D, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Hoek S, Izaurralde RC, Jones CD, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2019, The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison phase 1 simulation dataset, Scientific Data, 6, 50, doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0023-8</p>

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

AgMIP's Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set: LPJ-GUESS barley

<p>This is model output from LPJ-GUESS for barley as part of AgMIP&#39;s Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set.</p> <p>The data have been generated following the modeling protocol of Elliott et al. (2015) and has been used to evaluate the models (M&uuml;ller et al., 2017). A data description paper has been published in Scientific Data (M&uuml;ller et al. 2019).</p> <p>References:</p> <p>Elliott J, M&uuml;ller C, Deryng D, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Boote KJ, B&uuml;chner M, Foster I, Glotter M, Heinke J, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Mueller ND, Ray DK, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, and Sheffield J. 2015, The Global Gridded Crop Model intercomparison: data and modeling protocols for Phase 1 (v1.0). Geosci. Model Dev.&nbsp;8, 261-277, doi:10.5194/gmd-8-261-2015</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Glotter M, Hoek S, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Jones C, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Ray DK, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Song CX, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2017, Global gridded crop model evaluation: benchmarking, skills, deficiencies and implications, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1403-1422, doi: 10.5194/gmd-10-1403-2017</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Kelly D, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Hoek S, Izaurralde RC, Jones CD, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2019, The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison phase 1 simulation dataset, Scientific Data, 6, 50, doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0023-8</p>

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

AgMIP's Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set: LPJ-GUESS rapeseed

<p>This is model output from LPJ-GUESS for rapeseed as part of AgMIP&#39;s Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set.</p> <p>The data have been generated following the modeling protocol of Elliott et al. (2015) and has been used to evaluate the models (M&uuml;ller et al., 2017). A data description paper has been published in Scientific Data (M&uuml;ller et al. 2019).</p> <p>References:</p> <p>Elliott J, M&uuml;ller C, Deryng D, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Boote KJ, B&uuml;chner M, Foster I, Glotter M, Heinke J, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Mueller ND, Ray DK, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, and Sheffield J. 2015, The Global Gridded Crop Model intercomparison: data and modeling protocols for Phase 1 (v1.0). Geosci. Model Dev.&nbsp;8, 261-277, doi:10.5194/gmd-8-261-2015</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Glotter M, Hoek S, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Jones C, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Ray DK, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Song CX, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2017, Global gridded crop model evaluation: benchmarking, skills, deficiencies and implications, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1403-1422, doi: 10.5194/gmd-10-1403-2017</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Kelly D, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Hoek S, Izaurralde RC, Jones CD, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2019, The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison phase 1 simulation dataset, Scientific Data, 6, 50, doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0023-8</p>

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

AgMIP's Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set: LPJ-GUESS groundnut

<p>This is model output from LPJ-GUESS for groundnut as part of AgMIP&#39;s Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set.</p> <p>The data have been generated following the modeling protocol of Elliott et al. (2015) and has been used to evaluate the models (M&uuml;ller et al., 2017). A data description paper has been published in Scientific Data (M&uuml;ller et al. 2019).</p> <p>References:</p> <p>Elliott J, M&uuml;ller C, Deryng D, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Boote KJ, B&uuml;chner M, Foster I, Glotter M, Heinke J, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Mueller ND, Ray DK, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, and Sheffield J. 2015, The Global Gridded Crop Model intercomparison: data and modeling protocols for Phase 1 (v1.0). Geosci. Model Dev.&nbsp;8, 261-277, doi:10.5194/gmd-8-261-2015</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Glotter M, Hoek S, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Jones C, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Ray DK, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Song CX, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2017, Global gridded crop model evaluation: benchmarking, skills, deficiencies and implications, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1403-1422, doi: 10.5194/gmd-10-1403-2017</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Kelly D, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Hoek S, Izaurralde RC, Jones CD, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2019, The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison phase 1 simulation dataset, Scientific Data, 6, 50, doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0023-8</p>

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

AgMIP's Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set: CLM-Crop sugar cane

<p>This is model output from CLM-Crop for sugar cane as part of AgMIP&#39;s Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set.</p> <p>The data have been generated following the modeling protocol of Elliott et al. (2015) and has been used to evaluate the models (M&uuml;ller et al., 2017). A data description paper has been published in Scientific Data (M&uuml;ller et al. 2019).</p> <p>References:</p> <p>Elliott J, M&uuml;ller C, Deryng D, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Boote KJ, B&uuml;chner M, Foster I, Glotter M, Heinke J, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Mueller ND, Ray DK, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, and Sheffield J. 2015, The Global Gridded Crop Model intercomparison: data and modeling protocols for Phase 1 (v1.0). Geosci. Model Dev.&nbsp;8, 261-277, doi:10.5194/gmd-8-261-2015</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Glotter M, Hoek S, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Jones C, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Ray DK, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Song CX, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2017, Global gridded crop model evaluation: benchmarking, skills, deficiencies and implications, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1403-1422, doi: 10.5194/gmd-10-1403-2017</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Kelly D, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Hoek S, Izaurralde RC, Jones CD, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2019, The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison phase 1 simulation dataset, Scientific Data, 6, 50, doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0023-8</p>

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2018View details →
zenodo36/100

AgMIP's Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set: LPJ-GUESS rye

<p>This is model output from LPJ-GUESS for rye as part of AgMIP&#39;s Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison (GGCMI) phase 1 output data set.</p> <p>The data have been generated following the modeling protocol of Elliott et al. (2015) and has been used to evaluate the models (M&uuml;ller et al., 2017). A data description paper has been published in Scientific Data (M&uuml;ller et al. 2019).</p> <p>References:</p> <p>Elliott J, M&uuml;ller C, Deryng D, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Boote KJ, B&uuml;chner M, Foster I, Glotter M, Heinke J, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Mueller ND, Ray DK, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, and Sheffield J. 2015, The Global Gridded Crop Model intercomparison: data and modeling protocols for Phase 1 (v1.0). Geosci. Model Dev.&nbsp;8, 261-277, doi:10.5194/gmd-8-261-2015</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Chryssanthacopoulos J, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Glotter M, Hoek S, Iizumi T, Izaurralde RC, Jones C, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Ray DK, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Song CX, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2017, Global gridded crop model evaluation: benchmarking, skills, deficiencies and implications, Geosci. Model Dev., 10, 1403-1422, doi: 10.5194/gmd-10-1403-2017</p> <p>M&uuml;ller C, Elliott J, Kelly D, Arneth A, Balkovic J, Ciais P, Deryng D, Folberth C, Hoek S, Izaurralde RC, Jones CD, Khabarov N, Lawrence P, Liu W, Olin S, Pugh TAM, Reddy A, Rosenzweig C, Ruane AC, Sakurai G, Schmid E, Skalsky R, Wang X, de Wit A, and Yang H. 2019, The Global Gridded Crop Model Intercomparison phase 1 simulation dataset, Scientific Data, 6, 50, doi: 10.1038/s41597-019-0023-8</p>

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2018View details →

ScienceDex guides

Understand access before you commit

These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.

Compare curated 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.

allen-brain-atlas
neuroscienceopenDocumentation, web resources, and API references are available online.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

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.

abode-home-cage
behavioral-neuroscienceopenThe DataShare record exposes download links for annotations, documentation, license text, and the zipped per-snippet data directory.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

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.

dandi-nwb
electrophysiologyopenPublished Dandiset metadata and archive endpoints are available through the production DANDI API.
Last verified 2026-04-30Open record

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.

ibl
behavioral-neuroscienceopenPublic sessions can be searched and loaded from the IBL public data server through ONE.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record

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.

openneuro
neuroscienceopenPublished datasets are available on demand over the internet.
Last verified 2026-04-29Open record