International Journal on Digital Libraries

, Volume 6, Issue 4, pp 295–304 | Cite as

An intelligent decision support system for digital preservation

  • Miguel FerreiraEmail author
  • Ana Alice Baptista
  • José Carlos Ramalho


This paper describes a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) based on Web services technology designed to assist cultural heritage institutions in the implementation of migration based preservation interventions. The proposed SOA delivers a recommendation service and a method to carry out complex format migrations. The recommendation service is supported by three evaluation components that assess the quality of every migration intervention in terms of its performance (Migration Broker), suitability of involved formats (Format Evaluator) and data loss (Object Evaluator). Throughout the paper the whole workflow between these three components is explained in detail as well as the most relevant tasks that are carried out internally in each of them. The proposed system is also able to produce preservation metadata that can be used by client institutions to document preservation interventions and retain objects’ authenticity. Although the primary goal of this SOA is the implementation of migration based preservation interventions, it can also be used for other purposes such as comparing file formats or evaluating the performance of conversion applications.


Digital preservation Decision Support Systems Migration Service Oriented Architectures (SOA) Web services Authenticity Preservation metadata Preservation services 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abrams, S.L., Seaman, D.: Towards a global digital format registry. In: World Library and Information Congress: 69th IFLA General Conference and Council (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arts and Humanities Data Service: Ahds repository policies and procedures (2006). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Authenticity Task Force: Requirements for assessing and maintaining the authenticity of electronic records. Technical Report, InterPARES Project (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cohen,W.W.,Ravikumar, P., Fienberg, S.E.:Acomparison of string distance metrics for name-matching tasks. In: Kambhampati, S., Knoblock, C.A. (eds.) Information Integration on the Web (IIWeb)., pp. . Acapulco, Mexico (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cullen C.T., Hirtle P.B., Levy D., Lynch C.A., Rothenberg J. (2000). Authenticity in a Digital Environment. Council on Library and Information Resources, Washington, DC Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Darlington, J.: Pronom—a practical online compendium of file formats. RLG DigiNews 7(5) (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Diessen, R.J.v., Werf-Davelaar, T.v.d.: Authenticity in a digital environment. Report 2, Koninklijke Bibliotheek and IBM (2002)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Digital Curation Centre: Oais representation information registry/repository (2006). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Digital Preservation Testbed: Migration: Context and current status. White paper, National Archives and the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Eadie, M.: Preservation handbook—binary text/word processor documents. Technical Report, Arts and Humanities Data Service (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eadie, M.: Preservation handbook—bitmap (raster) images. Technical Report, Arts and Humanities Data Service (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ferreira, M.: Crib—conversion and recommendation of digital object formats web site (2006). http://crib.dsi.uminho.ptGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ferreira, M.: Crib: Migration workbench (2006). Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ferreira M., Baptista A.A., Ramalho J.C. (2006) Crib: A service oriented architecture for digital preservation outsourcing. In: Ramalho J.C., Lopes J.C., Simões A. (eds) XATA - XML: Aplicações e Tecnologias Associadas. Portalegre, PortugalGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Freed, N., Borenstein, N.: Multipurpose internet mail extensions (mime) part two: Media types. RFC 2046, Network Working Group (1996)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Google: Google trends (2006). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Graham, S., Simeonov, S., Boubez, T., Davis, D., Daniels, G., Nakamura, Y., Neyama, R.: Building Web Services with Java: Making Sense of XML, SOAP, WSDL and UDDI. Sams Publishing (2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Granger, S.: Emulation as a digital preservation strategy. D-Lib Magazine 6(10) (2000)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harvard University Library: Global digital format registry (2002). Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hedstrom, M.: Digital preservation: Problems and prospects. Digital Library Network (DLnet) 20 (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Heslop, H., Davis, S., Wilson, A.: An approach to the preservation of digital records (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hofman, H.: Can bits and bytes be authentic? preserving the authenticity of digital objects. In: International Federation of Library Associations Conference. Glasgow (2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jaro M.A. (1989). Advances in record-linkage methodology as applied to matching the 1985 census of tampa, florida. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 84: 414–420 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jaro M.A. (1995). Probabilistic linkage of large public health data files. Stat. Med. 14: 491–498 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lee K.H., Slattery O., Lu R., Tang X., McCrary V. (2002). The state of the art and practice in digital preservation. J. Res. Nat. Inst. Stand. Technol. 107(1): 93–106 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Library of Congress: Digital formats web site (2004). Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lorenzetto, G.P., Kovesi, P.: A phase based image comparison technique. In: Fifth International Conference on Digital Image Computing, Techniques, and Applications. Perth, Australia (1999)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lorie, R.A.: Long term preservation of digital information. In: First ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL’01). ACM, Roanoke, Virginia, USA (2001)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lorie, R.A.: A methodology and system for preserving digital data. In: Second ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL’02). ACM Press, New York Portland, Oregon pp. 312–319 (2002)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lynch, C.: Canonicalization: A fundamental tool to facilitate preservation and management of digital information. D-Lib Mag. 5(9) (1999)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    MacNeil, H., Wei, C., Duranti, L., Gilliland-Swetland, A., Guercio, M., Hackett, Y., Hamidzadeh, B., Iacovino, L., Lee, B., McKemmish, S., Roeder, J., Ross, S., Wan, W.k., Xiu, Z.Z.: Authenticity task force report. Technical Report, InterPARES Project (2001)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mellor P., Wheatley P., Sergeant D.M. (2002). Migration on request, a practical technique for preservation. In: Agosti, M., Thanos, M.C. (eds) ECDL ’02: 6th European Conference on Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries, pp 516–526. Springer-Verlag, London CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Monge A.E., Elkan, C.: The field matching problem: Algorithms and applications. In: Second International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining Portland, USA pp. 267–270 (1996)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    OASIS: Universal description, discovery and integration (uddi) (2005). http://www.uddi.orgGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    OASIS SOA Reference Model TC: Oasis reference model for service oriented architectures (working draft 10). Technical Report, Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OAIS) (2005)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Portuguese National Archives (Instituto dos Arquivos Nacionais/Torre do Tombo) and University of Minho: Roda (reposit=rio de objectos digitais autOnticos) web site (2006). http://roda.iantt.ptGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    PREMIS Working Group: Data dictionary for preservation metadata: final report of the premis working group. Final report, OCLC Online Computer Library Center and Research Libraries Group (2005)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rauch, C.: Preserving digital entities—a framework for choosing and testing preservation strategies. Master thesis, Vienna University of Technology (2004)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rauch, C., Pavuza, F., Strodl, S., Rauber, A.: Evaluating preservation strategies for audio and video files. In: DELOS Digital Repositories Workshop. Heraklion, Crete (2005)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rauch, C., Rauber, A.: Preserving digital media: Towards a preservation solution evaluation metric. In: Chen, Z., Chen, H., Miao, Q., Fu, Y., Fox, E.A., Lim, E.P. (eds.) International Conference on Asian Digital Libraries, vol. 3334, Springer, Shanghai, pp. 203–212 (2004)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rauch, C., Rauber, A., Hofman, H., Bogaarts, J., Vedegem, R., Pavuza, F., Ahmer, J., Kaiser, M.: A framework for documenting the behaviour and funcionality of digital objects and preservation strategies. Technical Report, DELOS Network of Excellence (2005)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rothenberg, J., Commission on Preservation and Access and Council on Library and Information Resources: Avoiding technological quicksand: finding a viable technical foundation for digital preservation: a report to the Council on Library and Information Resources. Council on Library and Information Resources, Washington, DC (1999). By Jeff Rothenberg. ill. ; 28 cm. “January 1999” “Commission on Preservation and Access, Digital Libraries”–CoverGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Rusbridge, A.: Migration on request. 4th year project report, University of Edinburgh, Division of Informatics (2003)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rushmeier, H., Ward, G., Piatko, C., Sanders, P., Rust, B.: Comparing real and synthetic images: Some ideas about metrics. In: Eurographics Workshop on Rendering Techniques. Springer, Dublin, Ireland (1995)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Shepard, T., MacCarn, D.: The universal preservation format: Background and fundamentals. In: Sixth DELOS Workshop. Tomar, Portugal (1998)Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Shepard, T., MacCarn, D.: The universal preservation format: A recommended practice for archiving media and electronic records. Technical Report, WGBH Educational Foundation (1999)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Shrestha, B., O’Hara, C.G., Younan, N.H.: Jpeg2000: Image quality metrics. In: American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. Baltimore, USA (2005)Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Stanescu, A.: Assessing the durability of formats in a digital preservation environment. D-Lib Magazine 10(11) (2004)Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information and Commission on Preservation and Access and Research Libraries Group: Preserving digital information: report of the Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information. Commission on Preservation and Access, Washington, DC (1996). Commissioned by the Commission on Preservation and Access and the Research Libraries Group. 28 cm. “May 1, 1996”Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Thibodeau, K.: Overview of technological approaches to digital preservation and challenges in coming years. In: C.o.L. Resources, Information (eds.) The State of Digital Preservation: An International Perspective. Documentation Abstracts, Inc.—Institutes for Information Science, Washington, DC (2002)Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    UK National Archives: Pronom - the file format registry (2002). Scholar
  52. 52.
    Wang, L.W., Zhang, Y., Feng, J.F.: On the euclidean distance of images. Ieee Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 27(8), 1334–1339 (2005). 934HW Times Cited:0 Cited References Count:18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wang, Z., Bovik, A.C.: A universal image quality index. Ieee Signal Processing Letters 9(3), 81–84 (2002). 543AR Times Cited:70 Cited References Count:4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Weirich P., Skyrms B., Adams E.W., Binmore K., Butterfield J., Diaconis P., Harper W.L. (2001). Decision Space: Multidimensional Utility Analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wheatley, P.: Migration: a camileon discussion paper. Ariadne 29 (2001)Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Wikipedia contributors: Color depth. Scholar
  57. 57.
    Wikipedia contributors: Color space. Scholar
  58. 58.
    Wikipedia contributors: Image compression. Scholar
  59. 59.
    Winkler, W.E.: The state of record linkage and current research problems. Technical Report, US Bureau of the Census (1999)Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Zhou, H., Chen, M., Webster, M.F.: Comparative evaluation of visualization and experimental results using image comparison metrics. In: IEEE Visualization, Boston, USA (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miguel Ferreira
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ana Alice Baptista
    • 2
  • José Carlos Ramalho
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Information SystemsUniversity of MinhoGuimarãesPortugal
  2. 2.Department of Information SystemsUniversity of MinhoGuimarãesPortugal
  3. 3.Department of InformaticsUniversity of MinhoBragaPortugal

Personalised recommendations