PCI Archaeology

330

Title *

Research workflows, paradata, and information visualisation: feedback on an exploratory integration of issues and practices - MEMORIA ISuse asterix (*) to get italics

Authors *

Dudek Iwona, Blaise Jean-YvesPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"

Year *

2023

Picture *

Abstract *

The paper presents an exploratory web information system developed as a reaction to practical and epistemological questions, in the context of a scientific unit studying the architectural heritage (from both historical sciences perspective, and engineering sciences standpoint). The article presents the methodological and analytical potential of this system for the description, analysis and information sharing of research workflows.  The MEMORIA prototype is first and foremost an effort to build a tool that should help us to ensure the traceability, transmissibility and verifiability of scientific results and fulfil the challenges of open science (providing free access to the content produced). The specificity of the system is to empower a formal characterisation of processes that led to a particular research result by listing the most important elements necessary for a proper understanding of the result.  An important point is the ambition to deploy visual interfaces providing access to resources and enabling direct analysis of the information collected. Ultimately, the project aims at depicting cognitive and methodological approaches behind scientific results using the possibilities offered by Information Visualisation. The paper presents and defines the key concepts behind our approach and describes how they develop in practice. The theoretical aspects are illustrated with practical examples. The paper concludes with an analysis of the benefits and potential of the systematic approach to scientific process documentation that we introduce, highlighting its advantages and discussing its limitations.

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these data (if you have any problems with the deposit of your data, please contact contact@archaeo.peercommunityin.org). In case all raw data are included in the preprint, indicate the DOI or URL of the preprint. *

http://memoria-dev.gamsau.archi.fr/is/enter.phpYou should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI or URL) giving public access to these scripts (if you have any problems with the deposit of your scripts, please contact contact@archaeo.peercommunityin.org). In case all raw scripts are included in the preprint, indicate the DOI or URL of the preprint. *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Indicate the full web address (DOI, SWHID or URL) giving public access to these codes (if you have any problems with the deposit of your codes, please contact contact@archaeo.peercommunityin.org). In case all raw codes are included in the preprint, indicate the DOI or URL of the preprint. *

You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://

Keywords (optional)

web-based information system, paradata, scientific results, research workflows, information visualisation, historical sciences

Methods that require specific expertise (optional)

NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).

Thematic fields *

Computational archaeology

Suggested reviewers - Suggest up to 10 reviewers (provide names and Email addresses). (Optional)

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

No need for them to be recommenders of PCIArchaeology. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct

Opposed reviewers - Suggest up to 5 people not to invite as reviewers. (Optional)

e.g. John Doe john@doe.com

Submission date

2023-05-02 12:50:39

Recommender

Isto Huvila

Reviewers

or Register
Submit a preprint