Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Ge Peng

Publications and source records attributed to Ge Peng.

15 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Stewardship Best Practices for Improved Discovery and Reuse of Heterogeneous and Cross-Disciplinary Earth System Data

Some of the Earth system data products such as those from NASA airborne and field investigations (a.k.a. campaigns), are highly heterogeneous and cross-disciplinary, making the data extremely challenging to manage. For example, airborne and field campaign measurements tend to be sporadic over a period of time, with large gaps. Data products generated are of various processing levels and utilized for a wide range of inter- and cross-disciplinary research and applications. Data and derived products have been historically stored in a variety of domain-specific standard (and some non-standard) formats and in various locations such as NASA Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs), NASA airborne science facilities, field archives, or even individual scientists’ computer hard drives. As a result, airborne and field campaign data products have often been managed and represented differently, making it onerous for data users to find, access, and utilize campaign data. Some difficulties in discovering and accessing the campaign data originate from the incomplete data product and contextual metadata that may contain details relevant to the campaign (e.g. campaign acronym and instrument deployment locations), but tend to lack other significant information needed to understand conditions surrounding the data. Such details can be burdensome to locate after the conclusion of a campaign. Utilizing consistent terminology, essential for improved discovery and reuse, is also challenging due to the variety of involved disciplines. To help address the aforementioned challenges faced by many repositories and data managers handling airborne and field data, this presentation will describe stewardship practices developed by the Airborne Data Management Group (ADMG) within the Interagency Implementation and Advanced Concepts Team (IMPACT) under the NASA’s Earth Science Data systems (ESDS) Program.

best practices↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

New Ways of Facilitating Improved Data Discovery and Access for NASA's Suborbital Earth Science Observations

NASA conducts field research in various Earth Science disciplines utilizing airborne and other non-satellite platforms to acquire in situ and remotely sensed observations indicative of physical processes across a range of scales. Field efforts are key in the development and validation of instruments and satellite algorithm refinements. The heterogeneous data, with a range of file formats, scales, and acquisition methods, support research in several science areas. NASA’s archive process assigns data products to discipline-oriented Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs) for stewardship. Over time, individual DAACs have developed tools for data browsing and serving disparate user bases. As science becomes more interdisciplinary, researchers need to incorporate observations from multiple campaigns, and multiple DAACs, into their work. Motivated in part by this shifting paradigm of needs, the Catalog of Archived Suborbital Earth Science Investigations (CASEI) was created. CASEI provides a single starting point to browse, search, and discover airborne and field data. Contextual metadata are organized and inter-linked allowing intuitive, integrated exploration across all NASA DAACs. Campaign science objectives, platform and instrument configurations, geographical details, geophysical concepts, and more are tracked in CASEI’s database, facilitating multi-parameter search, browse, and discovery of relevant data products. Researchers are able to directly access associated data products, via DOI links, regardless of the DAAC where they reside. Significant events, key time periods of high science interest within the longer-duration campaign effort, are also indicated and allow for a more efficient identification of critical data subsets. This presentation describes CASEI’s development, intensive metadata curation process, and demonstrates the web interface experience. Initial content metrics and plans for continued maintenance will also be discussed.

metadata↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Making Dataset Quality Information FAIR: Supporting Open-Source Science and Enhancing (Re)Use and Trustworthiness of Scientific Data

- Quality information should be documented and readily shared within and across domains. - Sharing of dataset quality information supports open science and trustworthiness of scientific data. - Dataset quality is more than data quality. - Quality tends to be domain-specific and context-dependent. - Community guidelines provide practical steps towards FAIR dataset quality information.

Ge Peng↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modern Scientific Data Governance Framework

Science has entered the era of Big Data with new challenges related to data governance, stewardship, and management. The existing data governance practices must catch up to ensure proper data management. Existing data governance policies and stewardship best practices tend to be disconnected from operational data management practices and enforcement and mainly exist in well-meaning documents or reports. These governance policies are, at best, partially implemented and rarely monitored or audited. In addition, existing governance policies keep adding additional data management steps that require a human, ‘a data steward’, in the loop, and the cost of data management can no longer scale proportionately with the current and future increased data volume and complexity. The goal for developing an updated data governance framework is to modernize scientific data governance to the reality of Big data and align it with the current technology trends such as cloud computing and AI. The goals of this framework are two folds. One is to ensure thoroughness that the governance adequately covers the entire data life cycle. Two, provide a practical approach that offers a consistent and repeatable process for different projects. Three core principles ground this framework. First, focus on just enough governance and prevent data governance from becoming a roadblock toward the scientific process. Remove any unnecessary processes and steps. Second, automate data management steps where possible. Actively remove steps that require ‘human in the loop’ within the management process to be efficient and scale with increasing data. Third, all the processes should continually be optimized using quantified metrics to streamline the monitoring and auditing workflows.

Rahul Ramachandran↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Data Quality Challenges for Analysis Ready Data (ARD)

Data quality plays a critical role in research and applications. The Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP) Information Quality Cluster (IQC) defines four aspects of information quality: Science, Product, Stewardship, and Services. The ESIP IQC has become internationally recognized as an authoritative and responsive resource of information and guidance to data producers and distributors on how to implement data quality standards and best practices for their science data systems, datasets, and data/metadata dissemination services. In recent years, cloud computing environments have provided scale-up capabilities such as data archives and services, enabling interdisciplinary science and applications. More value-added products are expected from data service providers, including Analysis Ready Data (ARD). ARD refers to data that has been preprocessed into a form that allows immediate analysis by the end user, processed to a minimum set of requirements and provides interoperability over time and across multiple datasets. Once a dataset has been developed from its original form to produce ARD, what quality characteristics should the derived dataset or ARD possess? Also, is it safe to assume that the quality of the ARD is consistent with the quality of the source data, or are there special attributes to an ARD that would warrant a secondary, independent quality assessment? What provenance (also called “data lineage”) information needs to be included in ARD? It is important to answer these questions, especially given the ease of use of ARD, and the consequent temptation by users to trust ARD without understanding the limitations or possible variations in quality compared to the source data. In this presentation, we will discuss data quality challenges for ARD products and services and introduce IQC for participation.

data quality↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Enabling Dynamic Data Governance in Science: Design, Implementation, and Future Directions of the Modern Data Governance Framework

As scientific data volumes exponentially grow, dynamic, flexible and open approaches to data governance are needed. In this paper, we describe our efforts to build an open, scientific Modern Data Governance Framework (mDGF) that streamlines and makes actionable data governance requirements for projects and data providers. We present the goals and design of the mDGF. We also share our envisioned usage for the mDGF and planned future work.

Kaylin Bugbee↗