@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix orcid: <https://orcid.org/> .
@prefix this: <http://purl.org/np/RAZ0b05uIC42PLl_0jrx-DNM29l3vLRhZ92uDXIBVeiUE> .
@prefix sub: <http://purl.org/np/RAZ0b05uIC42PLl_0jrx-DNM29l3vLRhZ92uDXIBVeiUE#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
@prefix prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#> .
@prefix pav: <http://purl.org/pav/> .
@prefix np: <http://www.nanopub.org/nschema#> .
@prefix doco: <http://purl.org/spar/doco/> .
@prefix c4o: <http://purl.org/spar/c4o/> .

sub:Head {
  this: np:hasAssertion sub:assertion;
    np:hasProvenance sub:provenance;
    np:hasPublicationInfo sub:pubinfo;
    a np:Nanopublication .
}

sub:assertion {
  sub:paragraph c4o:hasContent "From a process point of view, [41] introduced a methodology for publishing Linked Data. They dis- cussed activities which theoretically could be subject to crowdsourcing, but did not discuss such aspects explicitly. Similarly, [25] tried to map ontology engineering methodologies to Linked Data practice, drawing on insights from interviews with practitioners and quantitative analysis. A more focused account of the use of human and crowd intelligence in Linked Data man- agement is offered in [36]. The authors investigated several technically oriented scenarios in order to identify lower-level tasks and analyze the extent to which they can be feasibly automated. In this context, feasibility referred primarily to the trade-off between the effort associated with the usage of a given tool targeting automation - including aspects such as getting familiar with the tool, but more importantly creating training data sets and examples, configuring the tool and validating (intermediary) results - and the quality of the outcomes. The fundamental question the work attempted to answer was related to ours, though not focused on quality assurance and repair – their aim was come up with patterns for human and machine-driven computation, which could service semantic data management scenarios effectively. This was also at the core of [35], which took the main findings of this analysis a step further and proposed a methodology to build incentivized Semantic Web applications, including guidelines for mechanism design which are compatible to our fix-find-verify workflow. They have also analyzed motivators and incentives for several types of Semantic Web tasks, from ontology population to se- mantic annotation.";
    a doco:Paragraph .
}

sub:provenance {
  sub:assertion prov:hadPrimarySource <http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/SW-160239>;
    prov:wasAttributedTo orcid:0000-0003-0530-4305 .
}

sub:pubinfo {
  this: dcterms:created "2019-09-20T18:05:11+01:00"^^xsd:dateTime;
    pav:createdBy orcid:0000-0002-7114-6459 .
}