Large Scale Data Storage and Retrieval System using Keywords for E-governance

whenever we are storing any documents related E governance to cloud we need to secure it because there may be a malicious or third party attackers can hack data which in stored in cloud so that we need to create dynamic secure storage system. We are proposing improved encryption algorithm to give security for the text files related to E governance which we are going to store in the cloud. The improved RNS algorithm is one of the most widespread and commonly used methods and intriguing in the distribution and exchange of key. It can be said that this algorithm is a public key encryption system; the only objective of this algorithm is key distribution. After achieving security, to retrieve the file from the server Speed of transmission should be high, to achieve speech of transmission and searching efficiency, we are proposing Index Array Structure using MD5 Algorithm and Multi keyword Search for Searching Efficiency. To achieve Index Array Structure, from the text file all the unnecessary words, special characters and whitespaces are removed. The remaining keywords are extracted from the file. Remaining keywords occurrence is checked how many times the keywords are repeated. The repeated keywords weight age is noted in index array table. After weightage calculation, keyword ranking is checked. Keyword ranking is nothing but number of occurrences of keyword divided by total number of keywords in particular files (Term frequency). Finally, keyword ranking is stored in index array. After completing this process all the keywords are converted into hashed index with the grade access control key using MD5 algorithm. This converted hash key is inserted into index array. Finally, with the help index array content we are going to achieve Searching efficiency

A World That Counts: Mobilising The Data Revolution For Sustainable Development

This report sets out the main opportunities and risks presented by the data revolution for sustainable development. Seizing these opportunities and mitigating these risks requires active choices, especially by governments and international institutions. Without immediate action, gaps between developed and developing countries, between information-rich and information-poor people, and between the private and public sectors will widen, and risks of harm and abuses of human rights will grow

Towards a Digital Ecosystem of Trust: Ethical, Legal and Societal Implications

The European vision of a digital ecosystem of trust rests on innovation, powerful technological solutions, a comprehensive regulatory framework and respect for the core values and principles of ethics. Innovation in the digital domain strongly relies on data, as has become obvious during the current pandemic. Successful data science, especially where health data are concerned, necessitates establishing a framework where data subjects can feel safe to share their data. In this paper, methods for facilitating data sharing, privacy-preserving technologies, decentralization, data altruism, as well as the interplay between the Data Governance Act and the GDPR, are presented and discussed by reference to use cases from the largest pan-European social science data research project, SoBigData++. In doing so, we argue that innovation can be turned into responsible innovation and Europe can make its ethics work in digital practice

Development of Health Care e-Services in the European Union

Development and implementation of e-services has become a common practice of state and public administrations in the developed countries around the world since the usage of information and communication technologies has enabled a faster processing of user applications and more efficient functioning of the service. This paper analyses the level of development of e-services in health care systems of eight European countries, both in terms of safety and reliability from the perspective of end users, i.e. citizens. Furthermore, the concept of trust in eservices based on the availability of information on the Internet on applied technological solutions, storage and data protection and their availability is considered. Implementation of services like e-health records and e-prescriptions requires a well-developed strategy and a very transparent way of their functioning because of the sensitive nature of health data. For this study official websites of the services were searched through, as were other sources on the Internet. The research results indicate a lack of certain key information, especially those related to data storage, their protection and long-term preservation

Legal linked data ecosystems and the rule of law

This chapter introduces the notions of meta-rule of law and socio-legal ecosystems to both foster and regulate linked democracy. It explores the way of stimulating innovative regulations and building a regulatory quadrant for the rule of law. The chapter summarises briefly (i) the notions of responsive, better and smart regulation; (ii) requirements for legal interchange languages (legal interoperability); (iii) and cognitive ecology approaches. It shows how the protections of the substantive rule of law can be embedded into the semantic languages of the web of data and reflects on the conditions that make possible their enactment and implementation as a socio-legal ecosystem. The chapter suggests in the end a reusable multi-levelled meta-model and four notions of legal validity: positive, composite, formal, and ecological

Knowledge Graphs Evolution and Preservation -- A Technical Report from ISWS 2019

One of the grand challenges discussed during the Dagstuhl Seminar "Knowledge Graphs: New Directions for Knowledge Representation on the Semantic Web" and described in its report is that of a: "Public FAIR Knowledge Graph of Everything: We increasingly see the creation of knowledge graphs that capture information about the entirety of a class of entities. [...] This grand challenge extends this further by asking if we can create a knowledge graph of "everything" ranging from common sense concepts to location based entities. This knowledge graph should be "open to the public" in a FAIR manner democratizing this mass amount of knowledge." Although linked open data (LOD) is one knowledge graph, it is the closest realisation (and probably the only one) to a public FAIR Knowledge Graph (KG) of everything. Surely, LOD provides a unique testbed for experimenting and evaluating research hypotheses on open and FAIR KG. One of the most neglected FAIR issues about KGs is their ongoing evolution and long term preservation. We want to investigate this problem, that is to understand what preserving and supporting the evolution of KGs means and how these problems can be addressed. Clearly, the problem can be approached from different perspectives and may require the development of different approaches, including new theories, ontologies, metrics, strategies, procedures, etc. This document reports a collaborative effort performed by 9 teams of students, each guided by a senior researcher as their mentor, attending the International Semantic Web Research School (ISWS 2019). Each team provides a different perspective to the problem of knowledge graph evolution substantiated by a set of research questions as the main subject of their investigation. In addition, they provide their working definition for KG preservation and evolution

A Grand Challenges-Based Research Agenda for Scholarly Communication and Information Science [MIT Grand Challenge PubPub Participation Platform]

Identifying Grand Challenges A global and multidisciplinary community of stakeholders came together in March 2018 to identify, scope, and prioritize a common vision for specific grand research challenges related to the fields of information science and scholarly communications. The participants included domain researchers in academia, practitioners, and those who are aiming to democratize scholarship. An explicit goal of the summit was to identify research needs related to barriers in the development of scalable, interoperable, socially beneficial, and equitable systems for scholarly information; and to explore the development of non-market approaches to governing the scholarly knowledge ecosystem. To spur discussion and exploration, grand challenge provocations were suggested by participants and framed into one of three sections: scholarly discovery, digital curation and preservation, and open scholarship. A few people participated in three segments, but most only attended discussions around a single topic. To create the guest list of desired participants within our three workshop target areas we invited a distribution of expertise providing diversity across several facets. In addition to having expertise in the specific focus area, we aimed for the participants in each track to be diverse across sectors, disciplines, and regions of the world. Each track had approximately 20-25 people from different parts of the world—including the United States, European Union, South Africa, and India. Domain researchers brought perspectives from a range of scientific disciplines, while practitioners brought perspectives from different roles (drawn from commercial, non-profit, and governmental sectors). Notwithstanding, we were constrained by our social networks, and by the location of the workshop in Cambridge, Massachusetts— and most of the participants were affiliated with US and European institutions. During our discussions, it quickly became clear that the grand challenges themselves cannot be neatly categorized into discovery, curation and preservation, and open scholarship—or even, for that matter, limited to library science and information sciences. Several cross-cutting themes emerged, such as a strong need to include underrepresented voices and communities outside of mainstream publishing and academic institutions, a need to identify incentives that will motivate people to make changes in their own approaches and processes toward a more open and trusted framework, and a need to identify collaborators and partners from multiple disciplines in order to build strong programs. The discussions were full of energy, insights, and enthusiasm for inclusive participation—and concluded with a desire for a global call to action to spark changes that will enable more equitable and open scholarship. Some important and productive tensions surfaced in our discussions, particularly around the best paths forward on the challenges we identified. On many core topics, however, there was widespread agreement among participants, especially on the urgent need to address the exclusion of knowledge production and access of so many people around the globe, and the troubling overrepresentation in the scholarly record of white, male, English-language voices. Ultimately, all agreed that we have an obligation to better enrich and greatly expand this space so that our communities can be catalysts for change. Towards a more inclusive, open, equitable, and sustainable scholarly knowledge ecosystem: Vision; Broadest impacts; Recommendations for broad impact. Research landscape: Challenges, threats, and barriers; Challenges to participation in the research community; Restrictions on forms of knowledge; Threats to integrity and trust; Threats to the durability of knowledge; Threats to individual agency; Incentives to sustain a scholarly knowledge ecosystem that is inclusive, equity, trustworthy, and sustainable; Grand Challenges research areas; Recommendations for research areas and programs. Targeted research questions, research challenges: Legal economic, policy, and organizational design for enduring, equitable, open scholarship; Measuring, predicting, and adapting to use and utility across scholarly communities; Designing and governing algorithms in the scholarly knowledge ecosystem to support accountability, credibility, and agency; Integrating oral and tacit knowledge into the scholarly knowledge ecosystem. Integrating research, practice, and policy: The need for leadership to coordinate research, policy, and practice initiatives; Role of libraries and archives as advocates and collaborators; Incorporating values of openness, sustainability, and equity into scholarly infrastructure and practice; Funders, catalysts, and coordinators; Recommendations for integrating research, practice, and policy