4.7 Article

caGrid: design and implementation of the core architecture of the cancer biomedical informatics grid

Journal

BIOINFORMATICS
Volume 22, Issue 15, Pages 1910-1916

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl272

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIBIB NIH HHS [P20EB000591] Funding Source: Medline
  2. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/C531248/1] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Motivation: The complexity of cancer is prompting researchers to find new ways to synthesize information from diverse data sources and to carry out coordinated research efforts that span multiple institutions. There is a need for standard applications, common data models, and software infrastructure to enable more efficient access to and sharing of distributed computational resources in cancer research. To address this need the National Cancer Institute (NCI) has initiated a national-scale effort, called the cancer Biomedical Informatics Grid (caBIG (TM)), to develop a federation of interoperable research information systems. Results: At the heart of the caBIG approach to federated interoperability effort is a Grid middleware infrastructure, called caGrid. In this paper we describe the caGrid framework and its current implementation, caGrid version 0.5. caGrid is a model-driven and service-oriented architecture that synthesizes and extends a number of technologies to provide a standardized framework for the advertising, discovery, and invocation of data and analytical resources. We expect caGrid to greatly facilitate the launch and ongoing management of coordinated cancer research studies involving multiple institutions, to provide the ability to manage and securely share information and analytic resources, and to spur a new generation of research applications that empower researchers to take a more integrative, trans-domain approach to data mining and analysis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available