We must all accept that science is data and that data are science, and thus provide for, and justify the need for the support of, much-improved data curation. (Hanson, Sugden, & Alberts) 
 
Researchers are producing an unprecedented deluge of data by using new methods and instrumentation. Others may wish to mine these data for new discoveries and innovations. However, research data are not readily available as sharing is common in only a few fields such as astronomy and genomics. Data sharing practices in other fields vary widely. Moreover, research data take many forms, are handled in many ways, using many approaches, and often are difficult to interpret once removed from their initial context. Data sharing is thus a conundrum. Four rationales for sharing data are examined, drawing examples from the sciences, social sciences, and humanities: (1) to reproduce or to verify research, (2) to make results of publicly funded research available to the public, (3) to enable others to ask new questions of extant data, and (4) to advance the state of research and innovation. These rationales differ by the arguments for sharing, by beneficiaries, and by the motivations and incentives of the many stakeholders involved. The challenges are to understand which data might be shared, by whom, with whom, under what conditions, why, and to what effects. Answers will inform data policy and practice. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

科研数据共享的挑战 (The Conundrum of Sharing Research Data)

The identification of Hate Speech in Social Media is of great importance and receives much attention in the text classification community. There is a huge demand for research for languages other than English. The HASOC track intends to stimulate development in Hate Speech for Hindi, German and English. Three datasets were developed from Twitter and Facebook and made available. Binary classification and more fine-grained subclasses were offered in 3 subtasks. For all subtasks, 321 experiments were submitted. The approaches used most often were LSTM networks processing word embedding input. The performance of the best system for identification of Hate Speech for English, Hindi, and German was a Marco-F1 score of 0.78, 0.81 and 0.61, respectively.

/pdf/overview-of-the-hasoc-track-at-fire-2019-hate-speech-and-27y6nbsevs.pdf

Overview of the HASOC track at FIRE 2019: Hate Speech and Offensive Content Identification in Indo-European Languages

Hate Speech in social media is a complex phenomenon, whose detection has recently gained significant traction in the Natural Language Processing community, as attested by several recent review works. Annotated corpora and benchmarks are key resources, considering the vast number of supervised approaches that have been proposed. Lexica play an important role as well for the development of hate speech detection systems. In this review, we systematically analyze the resources made available by the community at large, including their development methodology, topical focus, language coverage, and other factors. The results of our analysis highlight a heterogeneous, growing landscape, marked by several issues and venues for improvement.

/pdf/resources-and-benchmark-corpora-for-hate-speech-detection-a-4ywvp0u1pg.pdf

Resources and benchmark corpora for hate speech detection: a systematic review

Data-driven and machine learning based approaches for detecting, categorising and measuring abusive content such as hate speech and harassment have gained traction due to their scalability, robustness and increasingly high performance. Making effective detection systems for abusive content relies on having the right training datasets, reflecting a widely accepted mantra in computer science: Garbage In, Garbage Out. However, creating training datasets which are large, varied, theoretically-informed and that minimize biases is difficult, laborious and requires deep expertise. This paper systematically reviews 63 publicly available training datasets which have been created to train abusive language classifiers. It also reports on creation of a dedicated website for cataloguing abusive language data hatespeechdata.com. We discuss the challenges and opportunities of open science in this field, and argue that although more dataset sharing would bring many benefits it also poses social and ethical risks which need careful consideration. Finally, we provide evidence-based recommendations for practitioners creating new abusive content training datasets.

/pdf/directions-in-abusive-language-training-data-a-systematic-1f88lrctry.pdf

Directions in abusive language training data, a systematic review: Garbage in, garbage out.

Citations are the cornerstone of knowledge propagation and the primary means of assessing the quality of research, as well as directing investments in science. Science is increasingly becoming "data-intensive," where large volumes of data are collected and analyzed to discover complex patterns through simulations and experiments, and most scientific reference works have been replaced by online curated data sets. Yet, given a data set, there is no quantitative, consistent, and established way of knowing how it has been used over time, who contributed to its curation, what results have been yielded, or what value it has. The development of a theory and practice of data citation is fundamental for considering data as first-class research objects with the same relevance and centrality of traditional scientific products. Many works in recent years have discussed data citation from different viewpoints: illustrating why data citation is needed, defining the principles and outlining recommendations for data citation systems, and providing computational methods for addressing specific issues of data citation. The current panorama is many-faceted and an overall view that brings together diverse aspects of this topic is still missing. Therefore, this paper aims to describe the lay of the land for data citation, both from the theoretical the why and what and the practical the how angle.

Theory and practice of data citation

Over the past years, the amount of online offensive speech has been growing steadily. To successfully cope with it, machine learning are applied. However, ML-based techniques require sufficiently large annotated datasets. In the last years, different datasets were published, mainly for English. In this paper, we present a new dataset for Portuguese, which has not been in focus so far. The dataset is composed of 5,668 tweets. For its annotation, we defined two different schemes used by annotators with different levels of expertise. Firstly, non-experts annotated the tweets with binary labels (‘hate’ vs. ‘no-hate’). Secondly, expert annotators classified the tweets following a fine-grained hierarchical multiple label scheme with 81 hate speech categories in total. The inter-annotator agreement varied from category to category, which reflects the insight that some types of hate speech are more subtle than others and that their detection depends on personal perception. This hierarchical annotation scheme is the main contribution of the presented work, as it facilitates the identification of different types of hate speech and their intersections. To demonstrate the usefulness of our dataset, we carried a baseline classification experiment with pre-trained word embeddings and LSTM on the binary classified data, with a state-of-the-art outcome.

/pdf/a-hierarchically-labeled-portuguese-hate-speech-dataset-5apd26nv80.pdf

A Hierarchically-Labeled Portuguese Hate Speech Dataset

Research data management is rapidly becoming a regular concern for researchers, and institutions need to provide them with platforms to support data organization and preparation for publication. Some institutions have adopted institutional repositories as the basis for data deposit, whereas others are experimenting with richer environments for data description, in spite of the diversity of existing workflows. This paper is a synthetic overview of current platforms that can be used for data management purposes. Adopting a pragmatic view on data management, the paper focuses on solutions that can be adopted in the long tail of science, where investments in tools and manpower are modest. First, a broad set of data management platforms is presented—some designed for institutional repositories and digital libraries—to select a short list of the more promising ones for data management. These platforms are compared considering their architecture, support for metadata, existing programming interfaces, as well as their search mechanisms and community acceptance. In this process, the stakeholders’ requirements are also taken into account. The results show that there is still plenty of room for improvement, mainly regarding the specificity of data description in different domains, as well as the potential for integration of the data management platforms with existing research management tools. Nevertheless, depending on the context, some platforms can meet all or part of the stakeholders’ requirements.

/pdf/a-comparison-of-research-data-management-platforms-12eslkf9nf.pdf

A comparison of research data management platforms: architecture, flexible metadata and interoperability

Research data management is acknowledged as an important concern for institutions and several platforms to support data deposits have emerged. In this paper we start by overviewing the current practices in the data management workflow and identifying the stakeholders in this process. We then compare four recently proposed data repository platforms—DSpace, CKAN, Zenodo and Figshare—considering their architecture, support for metadata, API completeness, as well as their search mechanisms and community acceptance. To evaluate these features, we take into consideration the identified stakeholders’ requirements. In the end, we argue that, depending on local requirements, different data repositories can meet some of the stakeholders requirements. Nevertheless, there is still room for improvements, mainly regarding the compatibility with the description of data from different research domains, to further improve data reuse.

A Comparative Study of Platforms for Research Data Management: Interoperability, Metadata Capabilities and Integration Potential

Research datasets in the so-called “long-tail of science” are easily lost after their primary use. Support for preservation, if available, is hard to fit in the research agenda. Our previous work has provided evidence that dataset creators are motivated to spend time on data description, especially if this also facilitates data exchange within a group or a project. This activity should take place early in the data generation process, when it can be regarded as an actual part of data creation. We present the first prototype of the Dendro platform, designed to help researchers use concepts from domain-specific ontologies to collaboratively describe and share datasets within their groups. Unlike existing solutions, ontologies are used at the core of the data storage and querying layer, enabling users to establish meaningful domain-specific links between data, for any domain. The platform is currently being tested with research groups from the University of Porto.

/pdf/dendro-collaborative-research-data-management-built-on-1zfxwkusc1.pdf

Dendro: Collaborative Research Data Management Built on Linked Open Data

It has been shown that data management should start as early as possible in the research workflow to minimize the risks of data loss. Given the large numbers of datasets produced every day, curators may be unable to describe them all, so researchers should take an active part in the process. However, since they are not data management experts, they must be provided with user-friendly but powerful tools to capture the context information necessary for others to interpret and reuse their datasets. In this paper, we present Dendro, a fully ontology-based collaborative platform for research data management. Its graph data model innovates in the sense that it allows domain-specific lightweight ontologies to be used in resource description, acting as a staging area for later deposit in long-term preservation solutions.

João Rocha da Silva

Papers

A Hierarchically-Labeled Portuguese Hate Speech Dataset

A comparison of research data management platforms: architecture, flexible metadata and interoperability

A Comparative Study of Platforms for Research Data Management: Interoperability, Metadata Capabilities and Integration Potential

Dendro: Collaborative Research Data Management Built on Linked Open Data

The Dendro research data management platform: Applying ontologies to long-term preservation in a collaborative environment.