codemeta use cases

lindangulopez · lindangulopez · commit e046216d1b4f · 2025-12-22T15:12:12.000+01:00
diff --git a/content/use-cases.md b/content/use-cases.md
@@ -2,302 +2,73 @@
 layout: single
 ---
 
-﻿Edited Use cases
-CodeMeta meeting in Portland
-Created 20160415 (use cases group pulled from here 230pm 20160516) [PDF export of google doc notes](/CodeMeta_Software_Use_Cases-Day2PM_WrkngGrp.pdf)
+# **CodeMeta Use Cases**
 
+*Highlighting how CodeMeta facilitates the integration of software into the research ecosystem, driving interoperability, transparency, discoverability, and promoting open science initiatives, especially through Open Source Program Offices (OSPOs) and community-driven efforts.*
 
+As research becomes increasingly digital and interconnected, the role of digital products—such as software, data, multimedia content, and interactive tools—becomes indispensable for advancing knowledge creation. However, these components often lack the proper recognition and citation within the scholarly ecosystem. Software, which plays a pivotal role of in scientific advancement, but is often overlooked in citation practices. CodeMeta aims to solve this issue by standardizing and streamlining software citation, ensuring accurate attribution, improving reproducibility, and promoting FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles across research disciplines.
 
+CodeMeta supports a machine-readable metadata format that enables the indexing, discovery, and citation of software across repositories. This benefits researchers, publishers, and funders alike. Key community-driven initiatives such as Force11, CHAOSS, the UK Software Sustainability Institute (SSI), and WSSSPE workshops have been instrumental in raising awareness and advocating for best practices in software citation. CHAOSS (Community Health Analytics Open Source Software), for example, promotes metrics for open-source sustainability, which complements CodeMeta's mission of fostering transparency and sustainability in software projects. Open Source Program Offices (OSPOs) in universities and research institutions have adopted CodeMeta to ensure proper recognition of open-source contributions. Funding agencies like NSF and NIH also sponsor these efforts, enhancing the reproducibility and transparency of research, where software and other digital tools play a central role.
 
+## **Key Use Cases for CodeMeta**
 
+1. **Enabling Reliable Software Citation**
+   CodeMeta enables the accurate citation, indexing, and proper crediting of software by providing structured metadata. This is essential in services like FAIRCORE4EOSC, which integrate CodeMeta into citation workflows. OSPOs are also integrating CodeMeta to ensure open-source software is cited correctly in academic publications.
 
-The “six” Use Case categories: from Matt and Carl’s slide summary 20160417
-* Facilitate citation
-* Enable credit, compliance, and quality
-* Facilitate discovery and access
-* Understand software functionality
-* Enable interoperability
-* Enable transparency and reproducibility
+2. **Standardizing Software Metadata**
+   CodeMeta defines a common, machine-readable vocabulary (JSON-LD) that ensures software metadata can be consistently shared across repositories, platforms, and domains. This standardization supports infrastructures like EOSC and initiatives promoted by CHAOSS in managing metadata at scale.
 
+3. **Improving Discovery and Reuse**
+   CodeMeta enhances the discoverability and reuse of software by applying consistent metadata schemas. With its integration into APIs and connectors, CodeMeta promotes the sharing and reuse of software across multiple platforms and repositories, reducing redundancy in research workflows.
 
+4. **Supporting Interoperability Between Systems**
+   CodeMeta serves as a metadata exchange layer, facilitating the seamless flow of metadata between different systems and repositories. This interoperability is crucial for OSPOs, helping universities and research institutions share open-source projects across platforms without the need for bespoke converters.
 
+5. **Enhancing Transparency and Reproducibility**
+   By providing standardized metadata, CodeMeta ensures software functionality, dependencies, and development processes are transparent, which is crucial for reproducible science. This transparency makes it easier for researchers to replicate and verify scientific results, supporting efforts in reproducibility as advocated by initiatives like OSPO and CHAOSS.
 
-THE ‘ORIGINAL’ 13 CASES: 20160415
-Then determine a final set of categorized use cases based on these 3 different sets
+6. **Citing Software Papers**
+   Software papers, which describe the performance and validation of software, should be cited along with the software itself. Journals like F1000Research, SoftwareX, and the American Astronomical Society (AAS) now support submissions focused on software, emphasizing its importance in academic citation practices.
 
+7. **Citing Derived Software**
+   Software often builds on previous versions or other tools. Just like research, derived software should be cited based on its dependencies. This ensures proper credit is given to both the original and modified software contributors, a practice promoted in the OSPO and CHAOSS communities.
 
-1. Identify software functionality
-   * Overall
-   * Module level
-   * Function level
-   * Identify functional equivalency with other {modules, functions, etc)
-1. Understand dependencies
-   * Identify Installation Dependencies (User)
-   * Identify Development/Build Dependencies (Developer)
-   * Use dependencies to enable transitive credit
-   * Automate build processes
-   * Identify dependencies to assign (aspects of? partial?) credit
-   * Understand role of software in an application (even if we cannot access or install)
-1. Facilitate Discovery
-   * Support discovery for reuse
-   * Discover tools that can perform a specific function
-      * Enable comparisons of tool functionality
-   * Classify and find tools by domain, and other controlled vocabularies
-   * Locate tools that were used for particular applications/results
-   * Discover location of software
-1. Enable credit, compliance, and evaluation
-   * Identify roles of software contributors
-      * Authors
-      * Metadata authors
-      * Curators
-      * Other roles (see publisher’s credit ontology)
-   * Document compliance with funders policies
-   * Identify funder of software
-1. Citation
-   * Cite software product generally
-   * Cite a specific software version/release
-   * Cite a software paper describing the software
-   * Provide sufficient info for formal citation in the reference list (authors, title, repository, publication year)
-   * Link to a landing page with more detailed information about the software
-   * Link to the source code
-1. Count the citations to a given version of software
-   * For acknowledgement/credit
-   * As a quality metric for discovery
-* Aggregate by person, by infrastructure, etc.
-1. Enable Interoperability
-   * Describe platform, language constraints
-   * Describe input-output formats
-   * Describe input-output semantics
-   * Enable pipeline building
-   * Describe constraints on parameters
-   * Identify license obligations
-1. Describe provenance information
-   * Execution parameters, limitations / assumptions
-1. Enable transparency and reproducibility (via dependencies and source linkages)
-2. Communicate permissions / License terms
-3. Identify software status (See http://www.repostatus.org)
-   * Build status
-   * Maintenance status
-   * Understand intention of software publication (compliance, reuse, etc.)
-   * …
-1. Motivate archiving of software
-2. Evaluate software quality
+8. **Software Peer Review**
+   Improving software reproducibility and citation enhances the software peer-review process. CodeMeta can include metadata like the peer-review status of software, supporting rigorous, transparent reviews of software in academic research.
 
+9. **Citation Format in Reference Lists**
+   Software citations should be clearly labeled (e.g., [Software], [Software: Source Code], or [Software: Container]) and include version information (e.g., Version 1.8.7). This enables clear differentiation from other research products in citation lists and encourages more consistent citation practices, especially in OSPO-backed projects.
 
+10. **Handling Citation Limits**
+    Some academic journals impose citation or page limits, which can discourage authors from citing software. CodeMeta supports efforts to revise publisher guidelines, ensuring software receives due credit without restrictions on citation or page limits.
 
+11. **Unique Identification via DOIs**
+    CodeMeta advocates for the use of DOIs (Digital Object Identifiers) as persistent, globally unique identifiers for software versions. This ensures that software can be accessed, reused, and reliably cited across different repositories, supporting the sustainability of open-source software and its integration into OSPOs and academic research.
 
+12. **Domain-Specific Community Activities**
+    Professional societies like the Astronomy Source Code Library (ASCL) and initiatives like Ontosoft for geosciences have played key roles in promoting software citation within their domains. CodeMeta helps facilitate interoperability between these domain-specific standards, ensuring consistent software metadata and enhancing discoverability.
 
+13. **Existing Efforts Around Metadata Standards**
+    Several communities, including DOAP and Ontosoft, have developed metadata standards for software citation. CodeMeta enables interoperability between these standards, providing a unified approach for sharing software metadata across repositories, ensuring consistency and accessibility.
 
+### **Additional Use Cases from Open Source and OSPO Initiatives**
 
+1. **Supporting Software Sustainability and Open Source Program Offices (OSPOs)**
+   OSPOs such as those at Johns Hopkins University and Université Grenoble Alpes are crucial for promoting sustainable open-source practices and managing software developed within academic settings. By integrating CodeMeta, these offices ensure that software is properly recognized, cited, and reused, ensuring long-term sustainability and fostering collaboration within the CHAOSS community.
 
+2. **Software Contribution Tracking and Visibility**
+   CodeMeta can be used to track contributions to open-source projects, providing visibility into the impact of software development efforts. OSPOs and initiatives like SustainOSS rely on tools like CodeMeta to make open-source contributions visible and to ensure credit is properly attributed, a central concern for the CHAOSS community.
 
+3. **Open Source Project Catalogs and Research Software Directories**
+   Platforms such as the Research Software Directory (Netherlands eScience Center) and the Open Source Project Catalog (Johns Hopkins University) help organize and catalog open-source research software. CodeMeta provides the standardized metadata needed for these directories, ensuring that software is discoverable, properly described, and connected to the broader research ecosystem.
 
+4. **Software Funding and OSPO Collaboration**
+   CodeMeta links research software to funding sources, helping OSPOs and academic institutions track the impact and sustainability of funded software. This is particularly important for funding bodies like NWO (Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research) and NSF, who need to ensure that research software is properly managed, documented, and disseminated.
 
+5. **Managing and Archiving Research Software**
+   CodeMeta facilitates the archiving of research software by embedding metadata within repositories, ensuring the long-term availability and reproducibility of software. This is essential for projects like Software Heritage, which aims to preserve open-source software for future generations of researchers.
 
+6. **Enhanced Collaboration Across Institutions**
+   CodeMeta enables better collaboration between institutions by making it easier to share software projects and metadata across multiple research groups and platforms. This aligns with the goals of OSPOs, who need to ensure that software developed within universities and research institutions is easily accessible, properly cited, and reused across the global research community.
 
-
-
-
-
-
-CodeMeta Meeting Portland, Edited Use cases, Working Document                        1
-Day 2, PM 20160416 : Carole Goble, Alice Allen, Ashley Sands, Patricia Cruse
-Edited Use cases
-Created 20160415 (use cases group pulled from here 3pm 20160516)
-CodeMeta meeting in Portland
-This document is the electronic version of the “whiteboarding” we did in the workshop
-
-
-
-
-
-
-	Stakeholder
-	Utility Infrastructure
-	Indexers
-	Developer
-	Repository Mgr.
-	Researcher
-	Funder
-	Publisher
-	Citation Mgr
-	Library / Curator
-	Action*
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	Deposit**
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	Discover: 3, 4
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	Analyse: 1, 2, 6, 9, 11
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	Use
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	C3R: 4, 5, 6
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-	
-
-TO DO:
-*add subpoints to each action
-**add concepts (by #) under stakeholder for each relevant action sub-point
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-  
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Stakeholder list pulled from SCWG:
-https://github.com/force11/force11-scwg/blob/master/sc-principles/software-citation-principles.tex
-
-
-
-Stakeholders: Digital Repositories, Publishers, Information Science, Indexers, Software Developers,
-
-
-datacite/crossref/orcid -- utility providers
-
-
-`Researcher'' includes both academic researchers (e.g., postdoc, tenure-track faculty member) and research software engineers. \item
-
-
-``Publisher'' includes both traditional publishers that publish text and\slash or software papers as well as archives such as Zenodo that directly publish software. \item
-
-
-``Funder'' is a group that funds software or work using software. \item
-
-
-``Indexer'' examples include Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Microsoft Academic Search. \item `
-
-
-`Domain group\slash library\slash archive'' includes the Astronomy Source Code Library (ASCL)~\cite{ascl}, bioCADDIE~\cite{bioCADDIE}, Computational Infrastructure for Geodynamics (CIG)~\cite{CIG}, libraries, institutional archives, etc. \item
-
-
-``Repository'' refers to public software repositories such as GitHub, Netlib, Comprehensive R Archive Network (CRAN), and institutional repositories. \item `
-
-
-``Citation manager`` refers to people and organizations that create scholarly reference management software and websites including Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote, RefWorks, BibDesk, etc., that manage citation information and semi-automatically insert those citations into research products.
+By integrating CodeMeta into the academic research ecosystem, software becomes an integral and properly recognized part of the scholarly record. These use cases align with broader open science initiatives, supporting reproducibility, software sustainability, and the continued growth of OSPOs, CHAOSS, and other community-driven efforts.
