CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 34

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Nanopublications: A Growing Resource of Provenance-Centric Scientific Linked Data

Kuhn, Tobias, Banda, Juan M., Willighagen, Egon, Ehrhart, Friederike, Evelo, Chris, Malas, Tareq B., Dumontier, Michel, Merono-Penuela, Albert, Malic, Alexander, Poelen, Jorrit H., Hurlbert, Allen H., Centeno Ortiz, Emilio, Furlong, Laura I., Queralt-Rosinach, Nuria, Chichester, Christine·2018·2018 IEEE 14th International Conference on e-Science (e-Science)
DOI 10.1109/escience.2018.00024
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/escience.2018.00024

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There are more than 10M nanopublications publicly accessible worldwide.

    “Overall, there are more than 10 M nanopublications publicly accessible worldwide [21].”

    From Provenance-driven nanopublications: representing source lineage and trust networks for multi-source assertions (2025) · cites this paper as [21]

    The indexed copy’s Abstract says that more than 10 million nanopublications have been published, but the audit instructions exclude the abstract as evidence. Searches for “10 million” and public accessibility found no eligible passage in the paper’s body establishing how many were publicly accessible worldwide. (LLM, conf=0.69)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 33

  1. verborgh, 2016, Triple pattern fragments: a low-cost knowledge graph interface for the web, Web Semantics Science Services and Agents on the World Wide Web Journal, 184, 10.1016/j.websem.2016.03.003 · DOI
  2. uhlen, 2010, Towards a knowledge-based human protein atlas, 28, 1248
  3. slenter, 2017, WikiPathways: a multifaceted pathway database bridging metabolomics to other omics research, Nucleic Acids Research, 661d
  4. 10.3233/SW-150189 · DOI · Paper page
  5. wishart, 2007, DrugBank a knowledgebase for drugs drug actions and drug targets, 901d
  6. 10.1186/2041-1480-5-28 · DOI
  7. di iorio, 2015, The RASH framework: enabling HTML + RDF submissions in scholarly venues, Proceedings of the ISWC 2015 Posters & Demonstrations Track
  8. dumontier, 2014, Bi02RDF release 3: a larger connected network of linked data for the life sciences, Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Posters & Demonstrations Track-Volume, 1272, 401
  9. 10.1007/978-3-319-93417-4_13 · DOI
  10. groth, 2010, The anatomy of a nanopublication Information Services& Use, 30, 51, 10.3233/ISU-2010-0613 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1093/database/bar030 · DOI
  12. kuhn, 2015, nanopub-java: A java library for nanopublications, Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Linked Science (LISC 2015)
  13. 10.1007/978-3-642-38288-8_33 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1007/978-3-319-25007-6_38 · DOI
  15. moreau, 2011, Provenance-based reproducibility in the semantic web, Web Semantics Science Services and Agents on the World Wide Web, 9, 202, 10.1016/j.websem.2011.03.001 · DOI
  16. 10.1016/j.future.2011.08.004 · DOI
  17. mons, 2011, The value of data Nature genetics, 43, 281, 10.1038/ng0411-281 · DOI
  18. 10.1007/978-3-319-25010-6_18 · DOI
  19. 10.4018/jswis.2009081901 · DOI
  20. putman, 2017, Wikigenomes an open web application for community consumption and curation of gene annotation data in wikidata, 2017
  21. beek, 2014, Lod laundromat: a uniform way of publishing other peoples dirty data, International Semantic Web Conference, 213
  22. 10.1145/1060745.1060835 · DOI
  23. capadisli, 2017, Decentralised authoring, annotations and notifications for a read-write web with dokieli, International Conference on Web Engineering, 469
  24. baker, 0, NHM interactions bank (2016)
  25. 10.3233/SW-140149 · DOI
  26. amberger, 2014, OMIM.org: Online mendelian inheritance in man (OMIM®), an online catalog of human genes and genetic disorders, Nucleic Acids Research, 789d
  27. kuhn, 2014, Trusty URIs: Verifiable, immutable, and permanent digital artifacts for linked data, European Semantic Web Conference, 395
  28. 10.1007/978-3-319-68288-4_26 · DOI
  29. 10.1109/TKDE.2015.2419657 · DOI
  30. 10.1152/ajprenal.00653.2016 · DOI
  31. lebo, 2013, PROV-O The PROV Ontology W3C Recommendation, 30
  32. 10.3897/rio.1.e7573 · DOI
  33. merofio-peiiuela, 2017, Automatic Query-centric API for Routine Access to Linked Data, The Semantic Web - ISWC 2017 16th International Semantic Web Conference, 10587, 334

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Kuhn, T., Banda, J. M., Willighagen, E., Ehrhart, F., Evelo, C., Malas, T. B., Dumontier, M., Merono-Penuela, A., Malic, A., Poelen, J. H., Hurlbert, A. H., Centeno Ortiz, E., Furlong, L. I., Queralt-Rosinach, N., & Chichester, C.
Venue
2018 IEEE 14th International Conference on e-Science (e-Science)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2018-10
Pages
83-92
DOI
10.1109/escience.2018.00024
Cited by
34
References
2

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review