Visualise Your Thesis is an international competition that challenges graduate researcher students to communicate their research to a non-specialist audience in a 60-second audiovisual presentation.
1Geoscience Australia, Cnr Jerrabomberra Ave and Hindmarsh Drive, Symonston ACT 2609
Dozens of tsunamis have been observed in Australia. Most were small, but the larger events generated hazardous waves and currents at the coast, as well as locally significant land inundation. To inform risk mitigation for this relatively rare hazard, we would like to know: Where are tsunamis likely to occur? How big? How often? How confident can we be? Probabilistic Tsunami Hazard Assessment (PTHA) provides an approach to answering these questions. It involves numerically simulating a large number of hypothetical tsunami scenarios from generation (typically by earthquakes) through to land inundation around the site of interest, as well as modelling of scenario frequencies based on historical data, physical theory and statistics. Advancements in HPC, and in the accurate measurement of coastal elevation over large spatial scales, are making it increasingly practical to conduct PTHA over large areas at high spatial resolutions. However, PTHA methodologies are not yet standardized and core scientific questions still need to be resolved: How should hypothetical earthquake-tsunamis be modelled to minimise biases in comparison to real tsunamis? How well do random tsunami scenarios represent historical events? How should uncertainties in the rates of large earthquakes be represented? This presentation will cover recent work on these questions by Geoscience Australia, focussed on better understanding Australia’s earthquake-tsunami hazard.
Gareth Davies works for Geoscience Australia on a range of coastal hazards projects, with a particular focus on tsunami hazards. He supports tsunami risk management in Australia via advice to cross-jurisdictional groups with emergency management responsibilities; is co-chair of the science working group of the Joint Australian Tsunami Warning Centre (in collaboration with the Bureau of Meteorology); and contributes to the Indian Ocean Tsunami Warning and Mitigation System.
Miaad Hussain1, Yvette Wharton2
2University of Auckland
Miaad is a Solutions Architect based in Sydney. He is passionate about helping customers understand how they can solve their workflow pains by transforming the way in which their people work.
Miaad studied Computer Science at UNSW and comes from a background in technology consulting, solution design and architecture having previously worked at various companies including Appian, Thomson Reuters and Ariba SAP.
Yvette is the eResearch Solutions Lead at the Centre for eResearch, University of Auckland, working on research data services and researcher enablement projects. She has extensive experience in University teaching, research and T environments and is passionate about using her broad knowledge to facilitate people to achieve their aspirations.
Secretary General, Research Data Alliance
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but as history shows us, we rarely learn from the past or do things differently when it repeats itself. The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a massive, fast track experiment for researchers, scientists and information management professionals across the globe. Never before have we witnessed such intense research, such investment of resources, availability of dedicated funding, such accessibility to relevant publications and data. It has demonstrated that science has no geographical boundaries, that cross disciplinary collaboration and cooperation is possible, that silos can be broken. At the same time, many stakeholders involved impress upon the urgency but the unsustainability of the current work. So what can we learn from this period? How can science, research and innovation reap the benefits of this learning curve? A reflection on global open science, the progress and the challenges ahead.
Hilary Hanahoe was appointed Secretary General of the Research Data Alliance (RDA) in February 2018. Her responsibilities include leadership of RDA’s membership, effective management of the RDA organization and its legal entity (RDA Foundation), engagement with RDA funders, stakeholders and organisations, and sustainable stewardship of the dynamic, active, and high-impact community of over of over 11,000 individual members from 145 countries worldwide, together with over 60 organisational members. Hilary is responsible for the financial and organisational sustainability of RDA on an international level and is the CEO of the RDA Foundation offices (Global and Europe). She works closely with the RDA Council and all governance boards and members of the RDA community. She is passionate about the work of the Research Data Alliance and its vibrant, volunteer community working to enable the open sharing and reuse of data
BoF session chairs:
Natasha Simons (ARDC), Melroy Almeida (AAF), Siobhann McCafferty (ARDC)
Presenters: Adrian Burton (ARDC), Jens Klump (CSIRO)
Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) such as ORCIDs and DOIs are critical to enabling FAIR research and lay the foundation for improved citation and tracking of research impact. The PID landscape nationally and internationally is varied, dynamic and evolving which can make it both exciting and challenging for researchers and research institutions to navigate.
- The goals of this raPID fire BoF session are to enable you to dip into this dynamic topic and:
- Broaden your understanding of the value proposition of PIDs
- Hear about a range of PID types and initiatives in use in research
- Create a space where you can raise challenges you may be having in adopting, integrating or using PIDs in your research and/or institutional research systems
- Provide an opportunity for you to hear about new developments in the PID landscape from the perspective of the organisation’s who enable and support PID adoption in Australia
In this session, you will hear a number of short raPID fire presentations from Australian “PIDs nerds” involved in a range of PID initiatives including but not limited to ORCIDs, DOIs, PIDs for research instruments, IGSN and RAID. Each raPID presentation will be followed by a short discussion and question time on the ideas presented.
Agenda for session
PID power – Adrian Burton (ARDC)
Focussing on the value proposition of PIDs, highlighting PID developments and opportunities
Topics for discussion:
- What PIDs are in use at your institution?
- What do you see as the main barriers for PID adoption at your institution?
ORCID – Melroy Almeida (AAF)
Update from the Australian ORCID consortium lead
Topics for discussion:
- What would improve the value of ORCID for your institution and/or your researchers?
- If you could make one improvement to ORCID what would it be?
PIDs for research instruments – Siobhann McCafferty (ARDC)
Sharing the work of the Identifiers for Instruments in Australia (i4iOZ) Interest Group
Topics for discussion:
- Why do instruments need identifiers?
- What identifiers are you using or considering using for your instruments?
IGSN – Jens Klump (CSIRO)
Overview of the IGSN for physical samples 2040 project and future outlook
Topics for discussion:
- What is the key value of the IGSN?
RAID – Natasha Simons (ARDC)
Spotlight on the relative newcomer, the Research Activity Identifier
Topics for discussion:
- How can RAID add value to your research institution?
Summary and session close
Note to participants
In this session, we will be making use of Menti to enhance discussion. Please have your mobile phone handy so that you can participate in the questions asked via menti.com (additional software not required).
We are also inviting you to participate in an optional “PIDs nerds” challenge. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to:
- Create a PID Pun – post your best PID Pun in the discussion forum during the BoF
The winner will be crowned chief PIDs Nerd for the day and receive an ARDC mug in the post.
Office of the CTO, NetApp APAC
When exponentially increasing data needs meets linear unit cost reductions, the resulting technical optimisations are often at odds with leveraging FAIR datasets across research projects. This presentation outlines the current state of the dilemma and proposes a way forward that focuses on accelerating research outcomes, and creating self-funding citable datasets.
John Martin, Director of Strategy and Technology, Office of the CTO, NetApp APAC
Based in Sydney, John is responsible for developing and advocating NetApp’s solutions for Artificial Intelligence, Machine learning, and large scale Data Lakes across the APAC region. He is one of the driving forces behind NetApp’s continued expansion into hybrid cloud architectures and machine and deep learning and works closely with field sales, the channel, and alliance technology partners to provide innovative solutions that solve customer business challenges.
While John is NetApp’s Hybrid Cloud and AI champion, he continues to provide technology insights and market intelligence to trends that impact both NetApp and its customers. Prior to his current role, John was NetApp’s ANZ’s principal technologist for over six years and has over 20 years’ experience working in the IT industry.
Vocabularies, Vocabularies, Vocabularies: Which ones should I use? Which ones should I trust? Which Ones….?
Dr Adrian Burton1, Dr Simon Cox2, Dr Lesley Wyborn1, Mr Rowan Brownlee1
1Australia Reserach Data Commons, Canberra, Australia
2CSIRO, Clayton, Australia
Use of shared or harmonised terminology is required to maximise semantic interoperability, particularly across different domains and in multiple communities. The term ‘vocabulary’ is used to denote any semantic asset containing terms and information about those terms, including value sets (i.e., bag of terms, term list), controlled-vocabularies, glossaries, thesauri, and taxonomies, and potentially even concept maps, ontologies, and knowledge graphs.
Online vocabularies and vocabulary services are proliferating, and users are uncertain as to which ones they should select. In 2019, a review of Research Vocabularies Australia for the Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC) noted multiple cases of semantically overlapping vocabularies even within the same service. To improve utility these vocabularies should be consolidated, or trust metrics be developed. Vocabulary metadata should clearly display governance and particularly usage information, which is a proxy for trust.
Consolidation is difficult. Requirements from different applications and contexts can lead to the development of new vocabularies with what appears to be the same scope as existing vocabularies. However, we need guidelines to help users determine if an existing vocabulary meets their needs, and which ones are reliable and sustainable.
The BoF will start with short presentations to set the scene, followed by two breakout sessions to begin development of guidelines for the selection of vocabularies that are fit for purpose, authoritative, governed, persistent. The first will canvass what users need to know in order to make a selection. The second will explore development of a “5-star vocab” ranking like the Five Star Open Data.
Adrian Burton is Director, Data, Policy and Services at the Australian Research Data Commons (ARDC). Adrian has provided strategic input into several national infrastructure initiatives, is active in building national policy frameworks to unlock the value in the research data outputs of publicly funded research.
Lesley Wyborn is an Adjunct Fellow at the National Computational Infrastructure at ANU and works part-time for the Australian Research Data Commons. She had 42 years’ experience in Geoscience Australia in scientific research and in geoscientific data management. She is currently Chair of the Australian Academy of Science ‘National Data in Science Committee’ and is on the American Geophysical Union Data Management Advisory Board and the Earth Science Information Partners Executive Board. She was awarded the Public Service Medal in 2014, the 2015 Geological Society of America Career Achievement Award in Geoinformatics and the 2019 US ESIP Martha Maiden Award.
Dr Peter Sefton1
1University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia
I would like to convene a BoF on data description, packaging and discovery/dissemination. I’m on leave so have not contacted others about this but would anticipate having a number of panellists from ARDC, CSIRO and various other institutions.
I have been involved in similar sessions focussing on packaging/description, but I think it would make sense to have one that brings together all the concerns across the entire research data lifecycle as they all involve metadata.
Peter Sefton is the Manager, eResearch Support at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS). Before that he was in a similar role at the university of Western Sydney (UWS). Previously he ran the Software Research and development Laboratory at the Australian Digital Futures Institute at the University of Southern Queensland. Following a PhD in computational linguistics in the mid-nineties he has gained extensive experience in the higher education sector in leading the development of IT and business systems to support both learning and research.
Establishing a Linked Sexual Health Database for Indigenous Primary Care Services: Ethical and IT Development Perspectives
Dr Clare Bradley1,2, Ms Helen Dockrell3, Professor James Ward4
1South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, Australia
2Flinders University, Bedford Park, Australia
3Notitia, Adelaide, Australia
4University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia
Aboriginal Community-Controlled Health Services (ACCHSs) routinely collect sexually transmissible infection (STI) and blood-borne virus (BBV) clinical data as electronic medical records (EMRs). At a population level these data are an underutilised resource and can be used to help drive clinical and public health interventions. Accordingly, we have established an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Sexual Health Surveillance network, known as ATLAS.
Key contacts at each site were consulted in order to minimise the impact of data extraction on site resources, maximise utility of analyses, and to ensure fair representation of site data.
Data are extracted and hashed using the University of Melbourne’s GeneRic Health Network Information Technology for the Enterprise (GRHANITE™) software. Data are stored in Microsoft Structured Query Language databases at the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute and analysed and visualised using R.
The ATLAS network currently includes more than 30 ACCHSs across five clinical hubs in four jurisdictions and encompasses multiple EMRs. Twelve performance measures have been defined in consultation with site contacts and clinical staff to constitute Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) metrics.
Relevant medical records are entered predominantly within free-text fields. Natural Language Processing is most resilient in processing and standardising these data and is used to translate the free-text data to a largely numeric record system.
The ATLAS team has established an integrated network of deidentified STI and BBV testing and management data. This network can be readily expanded and supports both research programs and CQI activities within participating sites.
Dr Clare Bradley is the Study Coordinator for the Centre for Research Excellence in Aboriginal Sexual Health and Blood Borne Viruses, currently located within the South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute’s Wardliparingga Aboriginal Health Equity theme. Clare’s current research interests are in the area of sexually transmitted infections and blood-borne viruses in Indigenous populations. Clare is also maintains involvement in research addressing aged care service planning, injury surveillance and outcomes, and administrative data linkage for use in epidemiologic studies.
The core capabilities of digital transformation you can’t afford to ignore: a model to assess research teams
Malcolm Wolksi1, Dr Michelle Krahe2, Joanna Richardson3
1Digital Solutions, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia
2Health Group, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Australia
3Library and Learning Services, Griffith University, Nathan, Australia
Within the higher education sector, there is a driving imperative to adapt to the new digital environment not only in areas involved in learning and teaching but also within research. While libraries play an important role in developing the digital literacy of researchers as individuals, little attention has been paid to the key digital skills and capabilities of the research team.
A critical review of digital transformation was undertaken from several broad areas (i.e. business, government and higher education) to identify suitable models or conceptual frameworks that could be applied to the research team environment. In addition, key elements that influence digital capability were identified.
As there were no existing frameworks suitable for assessing the digital capability of research teams, a model was developed by the authors. This model included five key transformation dimensions (continual assessment, culture, leadership, technical integration, workforce) and five operational capabilities (information management, analytical techniques, process agility, technology infrastructure, governance maturity). We describe how implementing the digital capability model, library staff can make an assessment and tailor support to better meet the needs of researchers across their organisation.
An increasingly important goal of research organisations is the need for continuous
development and adaptation of digital capability. Here we describe the key elements of an evidence-based model of digital capability with capacity-building principles and structured reflection and action. Importantly, this will also require collaboration between service providers in institutions from libraries, IT, research offices, graduate schools, faculty training providers and increasingly national providers.
Bio to come