Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Daniel C Berrios

Publications and source records attributed to Daniel C Berrios.

15 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2023

NLSP: NASA Life Sciences Portal

NASA’s Life Sciences Ports (NLSP) serves the scientific community by providing curated data from space life science experiment. The Human Research Program (HRP) with the help of NLSP is currently transforming their life sciences data archive systems and processes to improve compliance with the FAIR principles. Some of these improvements will at the same time support the twin pillars of Open Science: transparency of methods and reproducibility of results. This video is a high level overview of the NLSP for existing and new users.

Life Sciences data↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA biological and physical sciences databases: who’s the FAIRest of them all?

Conceptual models are a key part of the foundation of scientific study. Scientific data discovery and retrieval are often inaccurate and incomplete because these models are not sufficiently well-incorporated into data retrieval systems. Systems often don’t provide the necessary tools to those producing scientific data to fully and unambiguously annotate them and the result is consumers of the data cannot find them efficiently. The capability of data archives to provide these tools to link data to underlying conceptual models is one of dimensions of the recently developed “FAIR” principles (https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/ ), and is key to many automated processes being able to operate on these data, particularly analytics involving artificial intelligence. We used an open-source web service to measure the FAIR compliance of the three data archives operated by NASA for the biological and physical sciences: the Life Sciences Data Archive, the Physical Sciences Informatics database, and GeneLab. The service ingests references to data sets in these archives, and then executes domain-non-specific examinations of these data and metadata that test compliance to the FAIR principles. Of the 22 metrics tested, GeneLab passed 11 (50%), and PSI and LSDA each passed 7 (32%). These data were gathered using only one representative data set from each archive and we anticipate variability in results as we continue to apply these metrics to other data. A preliminary study of the failure traces for each metric suggests there is a wide range of effort and complexity in the enhancements required for each system to elevate FAIR compliance, and this is the subject of continued investigation. This information has been and will likely continue to be important information in planning these enhancements, with the goal of increased readiness of the data for automated processes.

database↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

New developments in space radiation research at NASA: Annotating data using a novel radiation biology ontology

Like many interdisciplinary sciences, data producers and consumers in the field of radiation biology often use a wide variety of terminology to describe their experiments and data. Furthermore, space systems and technologies are rapidly evolving, and a shared understanding and common terminology for these is also lacking. The efficiency of research organizations can be enhanced by standardizing metadata through the use of knowledge resources like ontologies. Employing a sophisticated model such as a formal ontology to standardize metadata enables automated data acquisition processes and supports more complete, accurate meta-analysis through more efficient and complete data discovery and retrieval, particularly when using multiple data sources. Thus, we developed the Radiation Biology Ontology (RBO) in order to improved radiation biology metadata uniformity and transparency. We used open-source software (the Ontology Development Kit, Protégé and WebProtégé) and worked within the OBO Foundry framework, which includes a set of ontology development principles and practices for ontology consistency, uniformity, and accountability. The RBO has now been incorporated into two radiation research data repositories, NASA’s GeneLab omics database (https://genelab.nasa.gov), and the European Commission STORE database (https://www.storedb.org/). Continuous build integration tools allowed our international RBO collaboration to be more efficient and focus its efforts on semantic model design. Currently, the RBO contains over 300 annotated classes and individuals specific to the study of radiation on biological systems, as well as imports of many additional classes from other OBO Foundry ontologies that relate to and/or provide context for these RBO entities. We publish the RBO through the OBO Foundry, so that it is available for browsing, download, and querying through NCBI Bioportal web site and application programming interface. The NASA Ames Life Science Data Archive (ALSDA) is also in the process of adopting use of the RBO, taking NASA one step closer to a knowledge-based system for space biology data. It is our hope that the global communities of radiation research Investigators, data curators and data analysts can similarly leverage the RBO and will contribute to its further development.

radiation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

INCREASING THE TRANSPARENCY AND REPRODUCIBILITY OF SPACE RADIATION SCIENCE: THE RADIATION BIOLOGY ONTOLOGY

Among the primary objectives of the Open/Open-Source Science paradigm are making scientific investigation data transparent and results reproducible [1], objectives shared by the FAIR principles [2]. To accomplish this, the conceptual framework that includes all the investigation objects needs to be accurately captured and communicated to all data consumers. A large part of this requires using metadata standards to annotate data collected. These standards should be readily accessible, informed by scientific community consensus and sufficiently specific to encompass all of the important aspects of the investigation. Starting in 2020 we have been co-leading an open consortium to develop a new metadata standard, the Radiation Biology Ontology (RBO), through the Open Biological and Biomedical Ontologies (OBO) Foundry [3]. We began by transforming many of the terms from the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement into concepts that can be formally related to existing OBO Foundry classes or attributes. We then identified and imported into the RBO existing OBO Foundry classes that have obvious relevance for radiation biomedicine (for example, concepts from the Environment Ontology that describe radiative processes, and concepts from the Gene Ontology dealing with molecular and cellular responses to radiation). Finally, we scrutinized datasets from investigations of radiation effects held in NASA GeneLab and LSDA repositories and added additional classes, instances, and attributes into the RBO that should be used to annotate these data. We developed the RBO using the open-source tools of GitHub and publish the RBO periodically through the NIH/NCBI BioPortal website, so systems worldwide can leverage the knowledge it contains [4]. This initial phase of concept modeling has yielded an RBO that at present has more than 300 declared concepts, with more than 3500 additional concepts imported from other OBO Foundry ontologies. While this first phase has focused on concepts for annotating samples, environments, exposures, and measurements, the next phase will center on supporting annotation of results and findings, such as concept models of molecular, cellular and tissue effects. The value of the RBO will be determined in part by our ability to engage the community in its development, and we have established a Radiobiology Informatics Consortium with unrestricted membership as the owner of the RBO in order to encourage investigators, system owners and other to join in this effort. Anyone can report issues or request new concept modeling or other features directly on GitHub. By using the BioPortal application programming interface, systems can pose dynamic queries to the latest version of the RBO for information on individual classes or entire hierarchies; this design eliminates the need for systems to be updated in order to use newer versions of the RBO. We hope to contribute to the advancement of open radiobiological science through the continued, open development of the RBO, that will provide more precise, machine-interpretable descriptions of investigations, as well as support data meta-analysis through machine learning or other artificial intelligence methods. REFERENCES [1] Open science in space. Nature Medicine, 2021. 27(9): p. 1485-1485. [2] Wilkinson, M.D., et al., The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data, 2016. 3: p. 160018. [3] Smith, B., et al., The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat Biotechnol, 2007. 25(11): p. 1251-5. [4] Whetzel, P.L., et al., BioPortal: enhanced functionality via new Web services from the National Center for Biomedical Ontology to access and use ontologies in software applications. Nucleic Acids Res, 2011. 39(Web Server issue): p. W541-5.

informatics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Holistic and Pragmatic Standards Processes Enable Interdisciplinary Science

Open, interdisciplinary science inevitably relies heavily on standards. Standards are those often unseen agreements that we take for granted when systems and processes are working fine. Yet standards work is perpetual, laborious, and sometimes contentious, especially for standards to work across diverse disciplines. Standards development, maintenance, and implementation is a complex, ongoing socio-technical process. NASA has developed a progressively open science policy and strategy that calls for the establishment of a data standards process reaching across the five diverse divisions of the Science Mission Directorate. This is a delicate exercise. We, therefore, seek to apply a holistic yet pragmatic approach to developing and maintaining a standards process. We adopt an ecological philosophy that focuses on the interactions within the data ecosystem and how standards facilitate those interactions. We couple high-level analysis with on the ground experimentation. We began by 1) mapping information ecosystem components (e.g. data centers, missions, services, protocols, users), 2)establishing how the components interact (e.g. sharing (meta)data, funding, personnel exchange), and 3) modelling system dynamics (e.g. creation of products from multiple data centers, redundant processes, shared services). The goal is to apply understanding of the ecosystem to real world applications (e.g. planning a new mission, implementing new policy requirements, improving process efficiency, etc.). We have also conducted studies of historical standardization efforts, documenting lessons learned and cautionary tales. We then contrast this more abstract work with real examples. We reviewed and assessed multiple existing standards development processes both within and external to NASA. We now work to implement an initial test process which can be further optimized. We seek to define a consistent approach for assigning persistent identifiers for research objects, especially for the purposes of citation. The experience from this relatively ‘simple’ test case adds a pragmatic perspective on how researchers and engineers actually work. This presentation will review the details of this methodology, our initial findings, and how they might apply to other interdisciplinary standardization efforts.

Mark A Parsons↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Life Sciences Portal (NLSP): Supporting Scientific Transparency and Reproducibility

NASA’s Life Sciences Ports (NLSP) serves the scientific community by providing curated data from space life science experiment. The Human Research Program (HRP) with the help of NLSP is currently transforming their life sciences data archive systems and processes to improve compliance with the FAIR principles [1]. Some of these improvements will at the same time support the twin pillars of Open Science [2]: transparency of methods and reproducibility of results. Scientific transparency is marked by the easily intelligible communication of what has been investigated: what were the procedures for collecting sample and the characteristics of samples collected? what kinds of measurements were made, what were the environmental conditions of the measurements? What were the analysis techniques of the collected data? Reproducibility of the results and findings from the investigation requires a high level of transparency for all but the simplest investigations; the slightest deviation in communicating and replicating complex experimental procedures or data analyses can often yield quite different data and even findings, thwarting their validation. One of the ways the NLSP is aiming to improve the communication of scientific information is through the use of ontology-driven metadata. Ontologies are powerful, graph-based knowledge representation structures, which can be leveraged to increase data interoperability, the area of the FAIR principles in which many data systems most lack compliance. Over the past decade, there has been a concerted effort in the biomedical community to develop modular and narrowly focused domain and application-specific ontologies in a common, open-source framework, the Open Biological and Biomedical Ontology (OBO) Foundry [3]. The open sharing and modular nature of this effort promises huge increases in harmonized data sharing for systems that leverage these models. Which is in line with the FAIR Data Principles of Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse for scientific data management and stewardship. 1. Wilkinson, M.D., et al., The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data, 2016. 3: p. 160018. 2. National Academies of Sciences, E. and Medicine, Open Science by Design: Realizing a Vision for 21st Century Research. 2018, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 232. 3. Smith, B., et al., The OBO Foundry: coordinated evolution of ontologies to support biomedical data integration. Nat Biotechnol, 2007. 25(11): p. 1251-5.

Life Sciences data↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Life Sciences Portal (NLSP): Supporting Scientific Transparency and Reproducibility

NASA’s Life Sciences Ports (NLSP) serves the scientific community by providing curated data from space life science experiment. The Human Research Program (HRP) with the help of NLSP is currently transforming their life sciences data archive systems and processes to improve compliance with the FAIR principles [1]. Some of these improvements will at the same time support the twin pillars of Open Science [2]: transparency of methods and reproducibility of results. Scientific transparency is marked by the easily intelligible communication of what has been investigated: what were the procedures for collecting sample and the characteristics of samples collected? what kinds of measurements were made, what were the environmental conditions of the measurements? What were the analysis techniques of the collected data? Reproducibility of the results and findings from the investigation requires a high level of transparency for all but the simplest investigations; the slightest deviation in communicating and replicating complex experimental procedures or data analyses can often yield quite different data and even findings, thwarting their validation. One of the ways the NLSP is aiming to improve the communication of scientific information is through the use of ontology-driven metadata. Ontologies are powerful, graph-based knowledge representation structures, which can be leveraged to increase data interoperability, the area of the FAIR principles in which many data systems most lack compliance. Over the past decade, there has been a concerted effort in the biomedical community to develop modular and narrowly focused domain and application-specific ontologies in a common, open-source framework, the Open Biological and Biomedical Ontology (OBO) Foundry [3]. The open sharing and modular nature of this effort promises huge increases in harmonized data sharing for systems that leverage these models. Which is in line with the FAIR Data Principles of Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse for scientific data management and stewardship.

Life Sciences data↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Acquisition of and Access to Research Omics Data

Omics data are essential for understanding the myriad and complex effects of space environments on humans. To assure maximum benefit from these kinds of data, the NASA Human Research Program Data Management Plan stipulates that human omics data should be archived within and accessed through the NASA Life Sciences Portal (NLSP). The NLSP has the capability to acquire and provision access to omics (and other kinds of) research results for individual and ad-hoc groups of subjects at the direction of institutional review boards, or other authorizing bodies or individuals, per institutional, program and investigation-specific policies and procedures. However, because some single-subject omics data, like CT scans and other kinds of large, complex biomedical data, could be used to identify heretofore unknown risks to the subject’s health, or, in certain cases, be used to identify a subject, NASA Policy Directive 7170.1 describes various policies regarding the management of and access to “research genetic testing” data, which includes many kinds of omics data. For example, NPD 7170.1 prohibits access to human research genetic data by NASA personnel who make employment decisions for the subjects from whom the data were obtained. To meet the objective of acquiring research omics data for NLSP in compliance with the policies in NPD 7170.1 and other applicable NASA policies, we designed NOMADS (the NLSP Omics Multimodal Acquisition of Data System), a new component that supports the transfer of large research data files, including research genetic testing data, using one of several different transfer mechanisms. The choice of mechanism is made by the submitter of the data, with guiding information from the system, and is likely to often be determined in large part by the nature and source location of the data. For example, for small files where the source data files are not already stored in a cloud storage system, users are likely to prefer to transfer their data to the NLSP via a web browser. Conversely, for large sets of files already organized and stored in a cloud storage system, users may opt for NOMAD’s cloud-to-cloud transfer method. All omics datasets targeted for the NASA Life Sciences Data Archive must pass a variety of quality checks to ensure data integrity and adherence to the standards defined by the LSDA Data Submission Guidelines (DSG) (see https://nlsp.nasa.gov/explore/lsdahome/datasubmit). These include requirements that data are consistent with open standards established by the omics community. Non-compliant data will not be accepted however archivists are available to advise submitters on how to revise data submissions and re-submit until compliance is achieved. Following compliance with the LSDA DSG, omics data next undergo a variety of additional quality checks to ensure the data meet omics community standards. Domain specific Omics data quality control tools and techniques are continually evolving and linked to the advancements in omics assays utilized and thus, the tools and techniques utilized by the LSDA for data quality control and validation will need to be sustained accordingly. All human omics data will be access controlled according to the policies described above, and requiring IRB approval for any additional access grants once the data are acquired (including access for analysis using the NLSP workspace tools).

Omics↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Meeting SPD-41a Requirements for BPS

In April 2021 BPS Formed the Science Data Management Work Group. This Poster describes the process and forward steps.

BPS Science Data Management↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Increasing Data Discovery and Re-Use: The Space Life Sciences Ontology

Two of the most important goals of the adoption of the FAIR principles are increasing the ability of agents to find and re-use research data. Achieving these goals for space life sciences research is even more pressing, given the relatively expensive and scarce nature of these data. We have reported in the past on the progress made by exemplar life sciences data systems towards implementing FAIR, showing gaps particularly in the “interoperability area” of the principles; the lack of common conceptual models for space life science research is one reason for this gap. There were few available resources that define, annotate, categorize or otherwise relate various kinds of metadata describing the acquisition, nature, and intent of investigational space life sciences data. To address this gap, NASA is working with the Open Biological and Biomedical Ontology Foundry (https://obofoundry.org/) to develop the Space Life Science Ontology (SLSO) that is intended to support archival and other kinds of systems that operate using these data. The scope of the ontology includes concepts regarding those aspects of investigation design and execution specific or unique to space environments, such as types of specialized equipment, operating organizations, and documentation. The ontology is continually being developed and published to the life science community (https://github.com/nasa/LSDAO/); at the time of this publication, the SLSO newly and uniquely defines 30 types (classes), 90 properties, and 14 relations specific to space life sciences metadata. In addition, the SLSO reuses (imports) some 2,360 types (classes), 49 properties, and 393 relations from other ontologies that are relevant to these kinds of metadata. In addition to its role as a common conceptualization for space biomedical research activities, the SLSO can also be used to provide automated support for traditionally difficult and expensive activities such as data curation and cross-system data integration and analysis.

fair↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Transformation of the NASA Life Sciences Portal to a FAIR Data Point

The FAIR principles emphasize optimizing metadata, the vast majority of which are textual in nature, and often organized into attribute name-value pairs. This uniformity has led to the development of guidelines and best practices for providing programmatic access to scientific data through their metadata, yielding the first iteration of the FAIR Data Point Specifications (FDPS). A key feature of the FDPS is its support for automated agents seeking and fetching data without first needing to learn a plethora of different application programming interfaces. These software agents can interrogate metadata catalogs that adhere to FDPS in a uniform manner because each catalog describes itself and its metadata schema consistently. This approach enhances the sustainability of data retrieval support, allowing systems to refine and update their metadata schemas as needed and without requiring data-seeking software agents to change how they interrogate FDPS catalogs. An essential aspect of the FDPS is the standardization of data catalog semantics, which formalizes concepts such as “metadata” and “metadata service” and links them to other concepts specifications including the Data Catalog Vocabulary (DCAT), a W3C standard that is also the basis of NASA-STD-2831 “Metadata Standard for Data Discoverability,” authored by NASA’s Office of the Chief Information Officer. The FDPS references DCAT (version 2) elements which focus on the distribution of datasets and support the goal of stream-lined catalog integration across repositories for improved data discovery. Additionally, the FDPS also prescribe the use of Linked Data Platform elements for data catalog-metadata record containment descriptions, allowing users to ascertain which data and metadata belong to which catalogs. NASA’s Life Sciences Portal is implementing the FDPS while formalizing its metadata schema to support the accelerated synthesis of knowledge from space life sciences investigations.

platform↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Governing Data Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability (FAIR) Compliance

The most recent data strategy documents at both the federal and NASA levels stipulate that systems should strive for the data they manage to be Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR). The NASA Life Sciences Portal (NLSP) has already begun leading efforts in this area for HRP, initiating efforts to comply with the FAIR principles. The broad interpretation of the FAIR principles has led to a plethora of tools that use a splay of metrics specifically but variably developed to judge how compliant data and systems are with the principles. A recent review [3] identified and studied 1,180 metrics across 20 publicly available tools for checking FAIR compliance of data and systems. Because of their very recent development, many organizations and data systems managers and developers have not yet had adequate time or resources to understand these FAIR compliance tools and metrics, their variations in design, accuracy or ease of application to their specific data sets and systems. Thus, it would be best for larger organizations like NASA to approach formulating a strategy for governance of FAIR compliance that can be flexibly applied and is adaptable to an evolving awareness knowledge of FAIR compliance methods and tools. In September 2024, the NASA Science Mission Directorate(SMD) organized a workshop on NASA science data repositories, including the topics of implementing FAIR and governing FAIR compliance across SMD. The initial part of these FAIR discussions focused on developing consensus around required science metadata fields. This is challenging given the diverse nature of NASA’s scientific data portfolio, the variety of metadata models and vocabularies used, and variable level of resources available to curate these data. Later discussion focused on three possible approaches to governing FAIR compliance: distributed, in which various programs, projects or systems define their own methods for assessing FAIR compliance, reporting results up appropriate management lines; centralized, in which higher-level organization(s) specify compliance tools or methods for the various data systems; and multi-level, in which a group comprised of individuals with expertise from multiple levels with organizations is formed to provide guidance and/or specifications for governing FAIR compliance. We report on the recommendations this session yielded, and how these might be shaped specifically to help implement and govern the compliance with FAIR of Human Research Program data and systems.

governance↗