Rebecca Sutton Koeser bio photo

Rebecca Sutton Koeser

Lead Developer at Princeton University Center for Digital Humanities, PhD in English Literature.

Twitter LinkedIn Github ORCID iD Keybase Humanities Commons

Author Identifiers in Scholarly Repositories

Simeon Warner, Cornell University

view presentation materials:

This was a presentation on author ids at arXiv and the idea of building services around a single author’s papers and proposing a mechanism for unique author ids across repositories.

Author name disambiguation is difficult; many people only publish one or two things; repositories are sliced into subject areas or institutions, and authors usually cross those boundaries.

There are already lots of existing author id schemes, e.g. AuthorClaim from; there are also more general human identification tools such ar OpenId. arXiv decided to make their own author id– opt in, author claims their papers, but then they provide services as motivation: e.g., a readable purl, paper list in multiple formats that can be embedded or included elsewhere. They are also have Facebook integration and hope to add OpenSocial API and LinkedIn.

Relevance/applicability here? My understanding is that arXiv has mostly sciences/mathematics type of material, so is only applicable to part of what we do here and I’m not sure that their new author id scheme helps us out all that much– especially having yet another author id scheme that only works for some of our scholars. However, the bigger issues are definitely interesting and relevant; our ETD system has already been around long enough that we have had the same student submit a second record with a different author name. Also, the ideas about providing services as motivation for scholars to deposit materials in a repository seem practical and helpful if/when we get to a larger institutional repository.

Sidenote/rant: what’s with all the Facebook integration? I was surprised at how many projects talked about having or wanting to implement Facebook integration. Is it just the allure of such a large potential user base that makes companies (and apparently libraries/universities/journals) drool? Has the scholarly community embraced Facebook to any great extent? Does Facebook really count as web 2.0? I have avoided Facebook so far, so maybe I’m just missing something or not understanding the draw…