Introduction defining context and scope

 

Provenance, deriving from the French term ‘provenir’ with the meaning ‘to come from’, was originally used to keep track of the chain of ownership of cultural artefacts, such as paintings and sculptures as it determines the value of the artwork. But this concept becomes more and more important also in the data-driven scientific research community. Here it is used synonymously with the word lineage meaning origin or source. The knowledge about provenance of data produced by computer systems could help users to interpret and judge the quality of data a lot better. In the W3C PROV[1] documents provenance is defined as information about entities, activities, and people involved in producing a piece of data or thing, which can be used to form assessments about its quality, reliability or trustworthiness.


 

Change history and amendment procedure

The review of this topic will be organised by  in consultation with the following volunteers: Type @ followed by first letters of person's name. They will partition the exploration and gathering of information and collaborate on the analysis and formulation of the initial report. Record details of the major steps in the change history table below.For further details of the complete procedure see item 4 on the Getting Started page.

Note: Do not record editorial / typographical changes. Only record significant changes of content.

DateNameInstitutionNature of the information added / changed
dateType @ followed by first letters of person's nameAcronym of institution A remark on the information added or changed
    

Sources of information used

As this topic is intensively studied both from the research viewpoint and from the viewpoint of those deploying and using provenance in production contexts, there are a large number of relevant papers and reports, cited from the text and further identified in the Reference Section of the deliverable D5.1. The following urls identify other useful sources:

 

Two-to-five year analysis

Of state of the art and trends based on sources and experience. A distillation of surveyed information leading to your conclusions and recommendations about what should be done in ENVRIplus (0.5 - 1.5 pages) structured internally as appropriate for the topic but with at least the following headings.

State of the art

One paragraph describing the current state of the art.

Trends

Subsequent headings for each trend (if appropriate in this HL3 style)

Paragraph(s) describing a trend(s).

Problems to be overcome

Sub-headings as appropriate in HL3 style (one per problem)

A short paragraph describing a problem to be overcome or barrier in the way of progress. 

Details underpinning above analysis

Please supply here any additional information that can help to justify the previous section e.g., references to material that someone can look up for themselves.  

Sketch of a longer-term horizon

e.g., 5-10 years ahead. Your best judgement about the future direction of technology and research trends (0.5 - 1 page).

Relationships with requirements and use cases

Link your analysis of the topic with particular identified requirements and use cases, as this will increase the relevance and help others understand your insights. Consider using tables to do this (0.5 - 1 page).

Summary of analysis highlighting implications and issues

This section should be suitable for the deliverable and also understandable on its own, without the need to read the rest of the material. A discussion of areas where ENVRIplus should change its plans as a result of your conclusions, and of open questions would be very useful here (0.25 - 0.5 pages)

Bibliography and references to sources

Insert numbered list of sources / references.