Vocabulary
The graph uses three controlled vocabularies to structure every node and connection: entity types, research domains, and relationship predicates. This page documents each one. For contribution guidelines, editorial standards, and the inclusion criteria for new nodes, see CONTRIBUTING.md.
Entity types
Each node carries a type/ tag that determines its directory, its shape in the graph view, and the role it plays in the ecosystem. Each tag is a clickable link that opens the index of all nodes carrying that type. A node may carry a second type tag when it genuinely operates in two distinct roles.
Actors
Entities with institutional identity: staff, governance, and physical or organisational presence.
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
| institute | A research-performing organisation: an institute, university, or national research body with its own staff and governance. |
| consortium | A multi-institution collaboration that jointly produces research data or findings. The consortium itself conducts the research. |
| programme | A time-limited funded activity organised around a defined research or infrastructure objective, typically with a funding period and deliverables. |
| biobank | A large-scale biological or clinical collection from human participants, providing samples or data for research reuse. |
| facility | A physical or compute service provider (from a single-institution core lab to a national facility network) that researchers use directly for imaging, sequencing, or computing. |
Standards
Formal specifications defining how data is encoded, organised, or described.
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
| fileformat | A specification defining how data is encoded at the file level: the byte structure or syntax of a file on disk. Examples: NIfTI, FASTQ, EDF, VCF. |
| ontology | A controlled vocabulary used to annotate entities, describing what something is, what it does, or where it is in the body. Examples: HPO, SNOMED CT, UBERON. |
| datamodel | A specification defining how data is organised or related: folder structures, schemas, or relational models. BIDS and NWB are data models. They specify organisation, not file encoding. |
| protocol | A formal procedure standard for research conduct, data collection, or reporting. Example: Open Brain Consent. |
Resources
Digital systems: data repositories and software tools with no independent institutional identity.
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
| repository | A digital archive where research outputs are deposited by contributors and retrieved by users. Examples: OpenNeuro, EGA, Zenodo. |
| tool | A software system or digital service for managing, processing, discovering, or accessing research data, but not primarily a data archive. Examples: LORIS, REDCap, DataLad, FAIRsharing. |
Governance
Entities whose primary activity is coordinating, regulating, or setting norms for the open science ecosystem.
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
| authority | An independent governmental or supranational regulatory body with legal mandate to issue binding decisions, authorisations, or enforcement actions. Covers national data protection authorities, medicines regulators, and supranational supervisory bodies. Examples: CNIL, EDPB. |
| policy | A legal instrument, institutional mandate, or funder requirement with enforcement conditions. Examples: GDPR, ANR Open Science Policy, EHDS. |
| principles | A voluntary normative framework that informs policy without itself carrying enforcement. Examples: FAIR Principles, DORA, CoARA, ECoC. |
| network | A coordinating or federating body that connects institutions or national nodes into a shared infrastructure. Distinguished from a consortium (which produces research) and a working group (which produces specifications). Examples: EOSC, ELIXIR, BBMRI-ERIC, NFDI. |
| working-group | A community body that produces specifications, governance frameworks, or endorsement decisions. Examples: BIDS Steering Group, GA4GH, INCF, RDA. |
Research domains
Each node also carries a domain/ tag specifying the research area it primarily serves. Nodes that span three or more specific domains, or that are entirely domain-agnostic, use domain/multimodal instead. Clicking any tag below opens all nodes in that domain.
| Domain | Covers |
|---|---|
| neuroimaging | MRI, fMRI, PET, and related structural or functional brain imaging |
| electrophysiology | EEG, MEG, iEEG, LFP, and multi-electrode or single-unit recordings |
| genomics | DNA/RNA sequencing, variant data, single-cell omics, and multi-omics |
| bioimaging | Light microscopy, electron microscopy, and biological imaging |
| behavior | Behavioural, cognitive, and psychophysiological measurements |
| clinical | Clinical trials, patient registries, and regulated research settings |
| health | Health data infrastructure, interoperability standards, and health data governance |
| reproducibility | Open code, workflow management, provenance tracking, and replication infrastructure |
| multimodal | Data repositories, tools, and networks whose primary function is handling or coordinating research data across three or more modalities, or that are entirely modality-agnostic infrastructure. Governance, policy, and regulatory entities that apply across domains carry no domain/ tag. |
Relationship predicates
Each connection in the graph carries a predicate drawn from a composite vocabulary built on FAIRsharing, schema.org, and Dublin Core, extended with custom governance terms. Predicates are directional: the more specific or dependent node writes the connection pointing toward the authority or standard. A repository writes endorsedBy: pointing at the body that endorsed it, never the reverse. This means parent and authority nodes accumulate connections only as backlinks, keeping them clean.
| Predicate | Meaning | Example |
|---|---|---|
accepts | Repository or tool accepts data deposited in this format or standard | OpenNeuro accepts: [[BIDS]] |
implements | Resource uses this standard in its internal data handling | Health Data Hub implements: [[OMOP CDM]] |
outputs | Resource delivers or exports data in this format | |
extends | Resource extends, derives from, or is a constrained profile of the target | NIDM extends: [[PROV-O]] |
requires | Hard technical dependency: this resource cannot function without the target | Rare. Most technical dependencies are covered by implements or accepts. |
recommendedBy | This resource is recommended by the target policy or governance body | Zenodo recommendedBy: [[EC Open Science Policy]] |
endorsedBy | Target body formally recognises this resource without controlling its development | BIDS endorsedBy: [[INCF]] |
governedBy | Target body controls the development process and owns the specification | BIDS governedBy: [[BIDS Steering Group]] |
producedBy | Target actor created or maintains this standard, resource, or tool | CIFTI producedBy: [[Human Connectome Project]] |
operatedBy | Target institution directly operates this digital resource | EDS AP-HP operatedBy: [[AP-HP]] |
fundedBy | Target organisation or programme is a primary funder | DANDI Archive fundedBy: [[NIH BRAIN Initiative]] |
isPartOf | Structural membership or sub-unit relationship | IFB isPartOf: [[ELIXIR]] |
memberOf | Formal member of a consortium, retaining full institutional independence | Rotterdam Study memberOf: [[ENIGMA Consortium]] |
nationalNodeOf | Formally designated national representative of a network | de.NBI nationalNodeOf: [[ELIXIR]] |
registeredIn | Trials, datasets, or identifiers formally registered in the target system | ADNI registeredIn: [[LONI IDA]] |
correspondsWith | Jointly maintained concept-level mapping between peer standards (symmetric) | |
relatedTo | A direct relationship exists but no more specific predicate fits. Use sparingly. |
ICM tags
Two additional tags mark the relationship of the Paris Brain Institute to nodes in the graph. They can be ignored by external visitors.
| Tag | Meaning |
|---|---|
| uses | The Paris Brain Institute operationally uses this standard, platform, or tool |
| participates | The Paris Brain Institute is an active member or participant in this body |