dataesr/scientific-paragraphs-categorization huggingface dataset:
MyDEP software Before performing experiments in the lab with DEP, it is useful to predict the particle and cell responses to the electric field. This requires knowledge of particles' or cells' properties, which can be obtained from the literature, and implementation of equations related to the particle model. MyDEP is a computational software programmed in Java, aiming to study dielectrophoretic behavior of particles and cells in a suspended medium. More precisely, the software can calculate and display the Clausius-Mossotti factor (real and imaginary parts) used in DEP for different conditions (medium, frequency range, particle model). It can also calculate the equivalent permittivities and conductivities of particles alone and in suspension in a medium thanks to the Maxwell-Garnett and Hanai equations.
Software for dielectric modeling In 1991, Irimajiri et al. (14). published a software for dielectric modeling of particles in suspension called  FIGURE 1  Illustration of the different spherical and ellipsoidal cell and particle models implemented in the interface. All the models-''homogeneous sphere,'' ''single-shell,'' ''two-shell,'' and ''three-shell''-are illustrated with an example. The implemented ''four-shell'' model is not illustrated here. ''IMPEDANCE ANALYSIS mini,'' programmed in BASIC. Unfortunately, this program is not available anymore. Dielectric modeling of particles behavior is often done in MATLAB  (2, 3) , and some authors have proposed MATLABbased programs that are available  (15). Those programs are, however, limited in terms of functionalities implemented, platform dependent, and may lack stability through the different releases of MATLAB and require an access to MATLAB.
MATERIALS AND METHODS The software MyDEP is written in Java using the swing application programming interface (API) and is freely available as a standalone. jar file for Windows, Mac, or Linux at http://doi. org/10. 5281/zenodo. 1321928. The installation of Java (also known as the Java Runtime Environment) is required (https://java. com/en/download). The software version number as well as the recommended Java version is available on the website https:// mydepsoftware. github. io, under the ''Getting Started'' menu (item ''Installation and system requirements''). A local database is embedded within the application using the SQL database engine SQLite. The Java Database Connectivity API was used to interact with SQLite. The static website hosted on GitHub Pages was build using Jekyll. A link to the website is available in the software under the ''Help'' menu (item ''Online resources'').
Database MyDEP allows the user to specify the electrical as well as the geometrical parameters of the investigated particle. No prior knowledge of the equations behind is required to use the software, which makes it interesting for users nonfamiliar with DEP. A database compiling information from the literature is provided to help the user start with already-existing data. The user can also enrich the database with new information. A local database is embedded within the application using the SQL database engine SQLite. The Java Database Connectivity API was used to interact with SQLite. The provided database contains for each set of data the name of the model, the authors, the title of the article, the journal in which it was published, and the year of publication, as well as the DOI or URL to help the users to identify where the model they are using is coming from.
An example of the database explorer is displayed in Fig. 2. This graph can be used to determine the direction of the DEP force. As shown in Fig. 3 , viable and non-viable yeast cells have a different behavior for the same medium conductivity, s m ¼ 7. 8 mS/m. The DEP force, which is proportional to Re[CM(f)], is always higher in magnitude for the viable yeast cells.
CONCLUSIONS MyDEP offers a new software alternative aimed at both DEP specialists and beginners. The software-delivered with a database compiling data from the literature, which can be updated automatically-aims at centralizing the electrical properties published in the literature and making them easily accessible to generate graphs. MyDEP also offers the ability to import the user's own data points to compare them to different cell models. Future developments of MyDEP will be toward parameter extraction from the user's own data set and to impedance calculation.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to thank  Koji Asami  and  Marc Castellarnau  for the data provided to test the software. The Ampere lab would like to acknowledge support from the  Institut National de la Sant e et de la Recherche M edicale (INSERM, Plan Cancer, Physicancer Program ,  Dynamo  project). The authors also acknowledge the support of the  Programme d'Avenir Lyon Saint-Etienne  ( PALSE mobility grant ) and the  Laboratoire d'Excellence iMUST  ( ANR-10-LABX-0064/ANR-11-IDEX-0007 ) from  University of Lyon  as well as the Doctoral school 160  EEA of the University of Lyon  for the mobility grant allocated.
Geographic information metadata provides a detailed description of geographic information resources. Well before digital data emerged, metadata were shown in the margins of paper maps to inform the reader of the name of the map, the scale, the orientation of the magnetic North, the projection used, the coordinate systems, the legend, and so on. Metadata were used to communicate practical information for the proper use of maps. When geographic information entered the digital era with geographic information systems, metadata was also collected digitally to describe datasets and the dataset collections for various purposes. Initially, metadata were collected and saved in digital files by data producers for their own specific needs. The sharing of geographic datasets that required producers to provide metadata with the dataset to guide proper use of the dataset-map scale, data sources, extent, datum, coordinate reference system, etc.
Because of issues with sharing and no common understanding of metadata requirements, the need for metadata standardization was recognized by the geographic information community worldwide. The ISO technical committee 211 was created in 1994 with the scope of standardization in the field of digital geographic information to support interoperability. In the early years of the committee, standardization of metadata was initiated for different purposes, which culminated in the ISO 19115:2003 standard. Now, there are many ISO Geographic information standards that covers the various aspect of geographic information metadata. This paper traces an illustration of the development and evolution of the requirements and international standardization activities of geographic information metadata standards, profiles and resources, and how these attest to facilitating the discovery, evaluation, and appropriate use of geographic information in various contexts.
They are essential for enabling collaboration between users of geographic information that interact together towards a common end, as well as for sharing and exchanging information, i. e. , interoperability. In 2005, the International Cartographic Association-Commission on SDI and Standards (formerly the Commission on Spatial Data Standards) compiled a comprehensive review of GI-metadata activities happening in Europe, North America, Asia/Pacific, Latin America, Africa/Middle East, and the ISO community. They also assessed major national and international GI-metadata standards in the world  [3]. This review demonstrated the many different flavors and variations of GI-metadata and, therefore, the need for international standardization of GI-metadata. The ISO Technical Committee 211 (ISO/TC 211) has been very active since its inception in the development of international standards for GI-metadata and their implementation in spatial data infrastructures (SDI)  [1, [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11].
International standards for GI-metadata include topics such as application schema description, methodology for feature cataloguing, metadata describing various types of geographic information resources (data, dataset, web services, etc. ), ontology, encoding rules and implementation schemas (XML and others), sensors (imagery, internet of things, etc. ), preservation of digital data and metadata, and so on. Although geographic information metadata is fundamental for the discovery, access, understanding and proper use of geographic information, standardization is essential to use them across applications and systems, i. e. , GI-metadata interoperability is required. This paper aims to provide insight into the development and evolution of the needs, requirements and international standardization activities of GI-metadata standards.
Fundamental international GI-metadata standards and ISO/TC 211 resources supporting their implementation are presented. Relationships between standards are mapped, important characteristics are highlighted, and use cases demonstrate how international GI-metadata standards are applied to for the discovery, evaluation, and appropriate use of geographic information under various circumstances and conditions. The next section of this paper provides background and an overview of early GI-metadata standards. Section 3 depicts fundamental ISO GI-metadata standards and resources in support of their implementation, pointing out prominent features of each. Section 4 demonstrates how ISO GI-metadata standards are applied through profiles, use cases, the use of ISO/TC 211 resources, and software and applications.
As more and more geographic information became available and users became more distant from the producers, it became apparent that some form of metadata was required. In many mapping agencies, there would be a report written describing the production process and sources used to produce the data. The readers are referred to  [3]  for an in-depth review of national, regional, and international GI-metadata standards. With the existence of many national, regional, and special information community metadata standards, differences in terminology, structure, and purpose between these standards led to a lack of global interoperability. This incompatibility was one of the drivers that led to the development of the original ISO geographic information metadata standard. However, this ISO standard was built on the experience gained in the development and use of these other standards, which were invaluable in its development.
International Metadata Standardization Activities-A Review There are mainly three organizations involved in international standardization activities for geospatial information. Firstly, ISO/TC 211, Geographic information/Geomatics, is a technical committee of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). It was established in 1994 and works towards a structured set of standards for information concerning objects or phenomena that are directly or indirectly associated with a location relative to the Earth. Secondly, the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) is an international not for profit standards organization. The focus of OGC work is to define, document, and test implementation standards for use with geospatial content and services. ISO/TC 211 standards and OGC standards complement each other: ISO standards are typically at a higher level of abstraction, while OGC standards are closer to the actual implementations.
ISO 19115:2003, Geographic Information-Metadata The standardization project 19115 is one of the first that started with the creation of the ISO/TC 211 structure in 1994. Its aim was to cover all the metadata elements for the whole ISO geographic information standards (also called the ISO 19100 series). However, its scope did not include imagery until 2001 (time when the ISO 19115-2 project started) nor geographic information service metadata. ISO 19115 was meant essentially for the description of geographic datasets and dataset series. The initial ISO 19115 standard was based on ISO/IEC 11179  [22]  that addresses the specification and standardization of data elements. It also followed existing works on metadata (e. g. , Dublin Core The following subsections provide a closer description of the most fundamental ISO GI-metadata standards listed in Table  1.
ISO 19115:2003, Geographic Information-Metadata The standardization project 19115 is one of the first that started with the creation of the ISO/TC 211 structure in 1994. Its aim was to cover all the metadata elements for the whole ISO geographic information standards (also called the ISO 19100 series). However, its scope did not include imagery until 2001 (time when the ISO 19115-2 project started) nor geographic information service metadata. ISO 19115 was meant essentially for the description of geographic datasets and dataset series. The initial ISO 19115 standard was based on ISO/IEC 11179  [22]  that addresses the specification and standardization of data elements. It also followed existing works on metadata (e. g. , Dublin Core and FGCD), with the intent to make the standard a superset of existing metadata standards in the field of geographic information  [23].
Its success came not only from encompassing existing initiatives but also from its extensibility, allowing nations or organizations to make their own profile easily by adding any class or attribute to the model. In In this new version of the ISO GI-metadata standard, a vocabulary shift can be observed from "dataset" to "resource. " Resource is recognized as a more general term to address any kind of geographic information such as vector and grid data and any kind of access, distribution, transformation mechanism including encoding, services, and Web services. Figure  2  illustrates the high-level metadata structure of the standard in a UML model, where MD_Metadata aggregates 12 specific classes that are, themselves, described in UML in specific packages within the standard or in other standards and are summarized in Table  3.
Content information This package supports the provision of metadata identifying the content of a resource by: citing the feature catalogue used to define the content (MD_FeatureCatalogueDescription); incorporating the feature catalogue (MD_FeatureCatalogue-defined in ISO 19110); or describing the content of a coverage resource (MD_CoverageDescription) which also may be specified as MD_ImageDescription. The main difference between the two generations is the new references to data quality from ISO 19157 (DQ_DataQuality) and to lineage information (LI_Lineage) which were previously part of the data quality package of ISO 19115. In addition, this version has brought in the cultural and linguistic capability that was previously defined in ISO 19139. With this capability, texts that documents metadata elements in one or more languages different from the default metadata language can be represented using the LocalisedCharacterString or the PT_FreeText type to replace the more basic CharacterString type, as shown in Figure  3.
Reference system information This package supports the metadata identifying the spatial, temporal, and parametric reference system(s) used by a resource in one class, MD_ReferenceSystem. data quality package of ISO 19115. In addition, this version has brought in the cultural and linguistic capability that was previously defined in ISO 19139. With this capability, texts that documents metadata elements in one or more languages different from the default metadata language can be represented using the LocalisedCharacterString or the PT_FreeText type to replace the more basic CharacterString type, as shown in Figure  3. Figure  4  illustrates the high-level structure of the extension for the description of acquisition and processing. The main class MI_AcquisitionInformation aggregates seven other classes: MI_EnvironmentalRecord, MI_Instrument, MI_Objective, MI_Operation, MI_Plan, MI_Platform, and MI_Requirement.
They are further classified into sub-elements. All these elements and sub-elements are used to express how well data adheres to the criteria defined in a data product specification. These elements are reported by values, which are typically results of tests and/or measurements, and evaluations of the difference between data and the Universe of Discourse from which it was observed. These data quality metadata elements are reported as metadata in accordance with ISO 19115-1. These data quality metadata elements are reported as metadata in accordance with ISO 19115-1. Secondly, ISO 19157 standardizes the components and structures to report data quality. It also guides producers in the selection of the right measures to report dataset metadata. Finally, it ensures that users have relevant and comparable measures to select the appropriate dataset for their purposes.
In that sense, the structure of geographic information is very fortunate, since it often consists of several layers. Even though the layers often are interdependent, they have different types of importance for the dataset and thus need preservation. Which layers must be preserved and which are less important should be determined with close cooperation between archival and geographic information domains and IT infrastructure experts. These experts have requirements that must be balanced against each other. When it comes to the preservation of geospatial data and metadata, functional requirements have to be fulfilled. These requirements are enumerated in Table  9. It is important to note that ISO 19165-1 does not provide any description on how the data and supporting data are physically stored.
GOM is responsible for deriving ontologies in OWL from the HM and to make them accessible on the Web. The group decided at the very beginning to derive OWL ontologies automatically from the harmonized model. A series of Jscripts were developed within the software Enterprise Architect for this purpose. As the derivation of ontologies was going on, a number of inconsistencies were found in the HM and then fixed. Consequently, the HM became robust and a crucial resource in ISO/TC 211. GOM has created the first GitHub repository with the goal to publish ISO/TC 211 ontologies (https://github. com/ISO-TC211/GOM). All of this made the initial ISO/TC 211 contribution to support geographic information on the Semantic Web and to build the Geospatial Semantic Web  [26] , i. e. , geospatial data on the Web.
Following the GOM experience with GitHub, the other maintenance groups then adhered to the ISO/TC 211 GitHub repository for publishing their resources on the Web (see https://github. com/ISO-TC211). Although distinct, these three maintenance groups now work side by side to ensure that all ISO/TC 211 resources are consistent and not contradictory. Recently, the initial ISO/TC 211 Web site "http://www. isotc211. org" has been reshuffled specifically for publishing official ISO/TC 211 resources to support implementation of ISO geographic information standards  [27]. First, all UML conceptual models of ISO geographic information standards are made available either in graphics or in an Enterprise Architect Project file. For instance, Figure  2  is also available at https://www. isotc211. org/hmmg/HTML/ConceptualModels/EARoot/EA1/EA12/EA2/EA15/ EA4463.
Important GI-metadata documents regarding metadata are the INSPIRE Metadata Implementing Rules  [40]  and the Implementing Rules on interoperability  [39] , which constitutes a profile of  ISO 19115 and ISO 19119. Other important documents are the thematic data specifications, for example the hydrographic specification  [41] , that can also be considered  ISO 19115 and ISO 19119  profiles. These profiles have important differences (Table  11 ) compared with the base standards but remain compatible (as mentioned before). Some interoperability issues remain. Most of them are from the semantic point of view. For example, the topic category identifying a dataset uses the ISO 19115 codelist and no specific rules have been set for INSPIRE, which results in a difficulty for implementers in choosing the right category and therefore in interoperability issues.
Restrictions in codelists or features The scope of geospatial information has been reduced to three values instead of the sixteen original values (attribute MD_ScopeCode): series identifying a geospatial dataset series; dataset identifying a geospatial dataset; service identifying a geospatial service. The hydrographic specification uses only nine of the ISO 19115 fifteen quality classes (commission, omission, conceptual consistency, positional accuracy. ). Since the profile deals only with vector data, the gridded data accuracy has not been implemented.
In this last case, since they already have the metadata, why not display them and make the world aware of what the data producers actually produce? In the European Union, member states have to produce and publish metadata for many public data related to the environment. In the INSPIRE Directive, it is clearly stated that when implementing the directive, it should, whenever possible, be based on international standards. In the case of metadata, one of the obvious choices was to use a profile based on EN ISO 19115:2003 Geographic information-Metadata. One of the Directive requirements is that the Member States within the European Union must provide access to the data through a geo-portal that includes the metadata. Therefore, this is a use case supported by a legal entity. Nowadays, data producers use the Web to make the people aware of their data products on their official website.
Esri Esri  [43]  has always understood the benefits of capturing, storing, and providing metadata about geographic information. Prior to the use of the term "metadata," Esri encouraged users to collect and store information about what we now call "provenance," coordinate reference system parameters, feature type descriptions, and other relevant information about geographic data files. In fact, Esri still encourages the use of "Item Description" for basic metadata about geospatial data files, especially for those users not inclined to use standardized metadata. Esri was one of the first GIS companies to implement the FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata. Esri fully implemented this standard automating the collection of metadata fields, which are intrinsic in the data. ArcGIS Desktop, ArcGIS Pro, ArcGIS Enterprise, and ArcGIS Online all support specific tailored GUI menus and auto-collection of intrinsic metadata to ease the collection of metadata plus read/write from/to for the following metadata standards: Geoportal Server is a standards-based, open source product that enables discovery and use of geospatial resources including data and services.
• Improve the efficiency and effectiveness of geospatial activities within the enterprise and across organizations, DCAT has been extended for the purpose of geographic information with the application profile called the GeoDCAT AP. The purpose of this extension is to enable the description of geospatial datasets, series, and services in compliance with ISO 19115:2003 and also to fulfill the INSPIRE Directive's requirements (https://joinup. ec. europa. eu/release/geodcat-ap-working-drafts/last-updated-2-sep-2018). The underlying objective with the extension was to make the search of geospatial datasets, series, and services possible on general data portals and thereby make it easier to share data and information across a wider range of sectors and domains.