search

ror-community / ror-updates

Central tracking for updates to ROR
49 stars 7 forks source link

Add a new organization to ROR: Henan Provincial Key Laboratory of Cyberspace Situational Awareness #2401

Open ror-curator-bot opened 1 year ago

ror-curator-bot commented 1 year ago

Summary of request: Add a new organization to ROR

Name of organization: Henan Provincial Key Laboratory of Cyberspace Situational Awareness Website: https://www.henan.gov.cn/2020/11-07/1886941.html Link to publications: https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/7168451 Organization type: Education (A university or similar institution involved in providing education and educating/employing researchers) Wikipedia page: Wikidata ID: ISNI ID: GRID ID: Crossref Funder ID: Aliases: Key Laboratory of Cyberspace Situation Awareness of Henan Province Labels: Acronym/abbreviation: Related organizations: City: Zhengzhou Country: China Geonames ID: 1784658 Year established: How will a ROR ID for this organization be used? To identify affiliations for research publications

Other information about this request:

adambuttrick commented 1 year ago

State cybersecurity facility in China. Funds and employs researchers. Solid affiliation usage. Should be added.

Publication affiliation usage: https://doi.org/10.3390/s22134892; https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/4147498; https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3306098; https://doi.org/10.1109/tcsvt.2022.3146517; https://doi.org/10.11959/j.issn.2096−109x.2022004

mariagould commented 1 year ago

I agree this seems like it would be in scope given research activities and affiliation usage. However, the provided metadata could be improved to support discoverability and disambiguation. E.g., is there a Chinese name? And does the organization have a website (the provided URL seems to be for a press release announcing the creation of this among other laboratories). I found one website that appeared to list the provincial key laboratories in Henan here, but I don't seem to be able to identify the cyberspace situational awareness entity on the list. Without additional IDs or other supporting information, I'm not sure if we should move forward on the basis of affiliation usage alone. I'll put this on hold so we can revisit it again if/when additional information is available.