The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Comparative Analysis of Modeling Approaches for the Association of FAIR Digital Objects Operations
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship
Wilkinson, M. D., Dumontier, M., Aalbersberg, I. J., Appleton, G., Axton, M., Baak, A., Blomberg, N., Boiten, J.-W., da Silva Santos, L. B., Bourne, P. E., et al. (2016) · Scientific Data · doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18 · Cited by 18,423
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 23
- 2023, FAIR Digital Object Technical Overview
- 2023, FDO Forum FDO Requirement Specifications
- 2022, ‘Canonical Workflow for Machine Learning Tasks’, Data Intelligence, 4, 173, 10.1162/dint_a_00124 · DOI
- 2025, kit-data-manager/DOIP-Client-and-TPM-Adapter- Service-for-FDOs: V 1.0.0
- 2023, ‘From implementation to application: FAIR digital objects for training data composition’, Research Ideas and Outcomes, 9
- 1976, ‘The entity-relationship model—toward a unified view of data’, ACM Trans. Database Syst, 1, 9, 10.1145/320434.320440 · DOI · Paper page
- 2022, Data Spaces: Design, Deployment and Future Directions, 1, 10.1007/978-3-030-98636-0_1 · DOI
- European Commission, 2021, EOSC interoperability framework: report from the EOSC Executive Board Working Groups FAIR and Architecture
- 2023, ‘FAIR digital objects, persistent identifiers and machine actionability’, FAIR Connect, 1, 29, 10.3233/FC-230001 · DOI
- 2023, ‘Assessing the FAIR Digital Object Framework for Global Biodiversity Research’, Rio, 9
- 2021, ‘Not Ready for Convergence in Data Infrastructures’, Data Intelligence, 3, 116, 10.1162/dint_a_00084 · DOI
- 2006, ‘A framework for distributed digital object services’, International Journal on Digital Libraries, 6, 115, 10.1007/s00799-005-0128-x · doi:10.1007/s00799-005-0128-x
- 2025, Marco-DKRZ/example-record-typing: auto
- 2020, ‘FAIR Data and Services in Biodiversity Science and Geoscience’, Data Intelligence, 2, 122
- 2022, FDO Forum FDO Configuration Types
- 2024, Digital Technologies to Implement the UN Sustainable Development Goals, 47, 10.1007/978-3-031-68427-2_3 · DOI
- 1998, Conceptual Modeling – ER ‘98, 211
- 2002, Types and Programming Languages
- 2019, Data Analytics and Management in Data Intensive Domains, 3
- 2020, ‘FAIR Digital Objects for Science: From Data Pieces to Actionable Knowledge Units’, Publications, 8, 21, 10.3390/publications8020021 · DOI
- 2024, ‘Evaluating FAIR Digital Object and Linked Data as distributed object systems’, PeerJ Computer Science, 10
- 2019, RDA Recommendation on PID Kernel Information
- 2018, Common Patterns in Revolutionary Infrastructures and Data
Metadata
- Authors
- Blumenröhr, N., Böhm, J., Ost, P., Kulüke, M., Wittenburg, P., Blanchi, C., Bingert, S., & Schwardmann, U.
- Venue
- Data Science Journal
- Publisher
- Ubiquity Press, Ltd.
- Published
- 2025
- Volume
- 1
- ISSN
- 1683-1470
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
- Funders
- Helmholtz Metadata Collaboration Platform (HMC), NFDI4ING (442146713)
- European High Performance Computing Joint Undertaking (JU) (101093054)
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Comparative Analysis of Modeling Approaches for the Association of FAIR Digital Objects Operations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5334/dsj-2025-022
- The paper
- Blumenröhr, N., Böhm, J., Ost, P., Kulüke, M., Wittenburg, P., Blanchi, C., Bingert, S., & Schwardmann, U. (2025). A Comparative Analysis of Modeling Approaches for the Association of FAIR Digital Objects Operations. Data Science Journal. https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2025-022
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
