FSP FAQs: Review
Fundamental Science Practices for all aspects of product reviews, including the number and type of reviews required for each product type, who may serve as a peer reviewer, rigor of peer reviews, review requirements for influential products as defined by the Office of Management and Budget, and Bureau review and approval.
Filter Total Items: 30
What types of review are required before approval of scientific software for publication as a software release? [059] What types of review are required before approval of scientific software for publication as a software release? [059]
Approval of scientific software requires two reviews—a code review and a domain review as described in this FAQ. A single reviewer can perform either review or both reviews. The reviewer(s) are selected by the software author with concurrence of a Science Center Director for their qualifications to perform such reviews. [Read more]
How do FSP requirements for release of scientific software compare to those for release of scientific data? [060] How do FSP requirements for release of scientific software compare to those for release of scientific data? [060]
USGS scientific software and data follow the same basic FSP requirements for review and approval and both are considered noninterpretive information. Both releases are subject to the requirements of the 2013 OSTP directive on increasing access to the results of federally funded scientific research. [Read more]
What information must be in IPDS for a publication under review, relevant to data/software to allow bureau approval from a BAO? [073] What information must be in IPDS for a publication under review, relevant to data/software to allow bureau approval from a BAO? [073]
The IPDS record of the manuscript must contain the IP number and DOI of the accompanying data/software release. [Read more]
Who may review data and metadata? [124] Who may review data and metadata? [124]
A qualified individual or separate individuals possessing technical expertise, familiarity with data may conduct data and metadata reviews. [Read more]
What is a names review? [204] What is a names review? [204]
A names review verifies that technical, scientific nomenclature is correct and used appropriately; Tribal names are federally recognized; and words, names, or phrases that may be viewed as derogatory or offensive are not used. [Read more]
What are the requirements for a names review? [205] What are the requirements for a names review? [205]
A names review is required for all USGS information products that include technical biologic, hydrologic, geographic, geologic, and (or) Tribal names. The names review verifies spelling, use, and style in the text, tables, figures, captions, charts, appendices, plates, and supplements and should be completed prior to Bureau approval [Read more]
Who can conduct a names review? [206] Who can conduct a names review? [206]
Anyone possessing appropriate subject matter expertise may complete a names review, separately or as part of a peer review. Reviewer should not be directly associated with work being reviewed. [Read more]
How is a names review documented in the internal Information Product Data System (IPDS)? [207] How is a names review documented in the internal Information Product Data System (IPDS)? [207]
A names review is documented in the internal IPDS by adding a reviewer of type “Names review” on the Reviewers tab. Documentation provided by the reviewer, and reconciliation by the author, should be uploaded to the IPDS Documents tab. [Read more]
What resources are available to support a names review? [208] What resources are available to support a names review? [208]
In addition to internal Suggestions to Authors of the Reports of the USGS, 8th Edition, authoritative sources are available for biologic, geologic, geographic, and hydrologic names; Tribal names; and derogatory names, words, and(or) phrases. [Read more]