Enrich with RVK based on Culturegraph

[dr0i]

From our appointment on 13th February 2020. @hagbeck's workflow (which we shall implement at lobid):

• filter to get all Culturegraph(CG)-clusters with hbz holdings (1058-enrichWithCulturegraphRvkWithFix #1921)
• build concordance: hbzID to RVK-Notations (1058-enrichWithCulturegraphRvkWithFix #1921)
• query this concordance when indexing fulldumps and updates (Enrich with RVK concordance #2024)
• Write Blogpost
• update lookup table once a month based on new data from https://data.dnb.de/culturegraph/

See https://katalog.ub.tu-dortmund.de/taxonomy/tree for Dortmund's enrichment.

Example in culturegraph, see field 084.

Download CG data at : https://data.dnb.de/culturegraph/ , atm aggregate_20240507.marcxml.gz

[TobiasNx]

@dr0i should we implement this for ALMA too?

[dr0i]

Yeah I definitely have this on my mind ! :) (and we do it only with ALMA and Fix)

[dr0i]

Check next Monday.
Also, at some point we need to update the data automatically. Should be sufficient to get the data once a month from https://data.dnb.de/culturegraph/ .

[dr0i]

Seems good, check e.g. https://lobid.org/resources/990062574560206441.
See all resources having a RVK notation (6.8 M): https://lobid.org/resources/search?q=subject.source.id%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fd-nb.info%2Fgnd%2F4449787-8%22

[acka47]

update lookup table once a month based on new data from https://data.dnb.de/culturegraph/

This to do is still open, @dr0i .

[TobiasNx]

I thought about this today. Does it make sense to mark the enriched rvk elements with a version property, even if it is not really correct?

e.g.

"subject":[
   {
      "notation":"SK 110",
      "type":[
         "Concept"
      ],
      "version":"enrichment",
      "source":{
         "label":"RVK (Regensburger Verbundklassifikation)",
         "id":"https://d-nb.info/gnd/4449787-8"
      }
   },

[acka47]

I thought about this today. Does it make sense to mark the enriched rvk elements with a version property, even if it is not really correct?

We have already discussed this and addressed the question in the blog post: https://blog.lobid.org/2024/07/04/rvk-enrichment.html#verzicht-auf-provenienzangaben Until now, nobody asked for a marker, so that I'd say we don't need it. We can re-evaluate if things change.

[dr0i]

To be checked after 11th September (second Wednesday in a month).

[dr0i]

The monthly update looks good:

~/git/lobid-resources-alma$ ls -hal lookup-tables/data/rvk*
-rw-rw-r-- 1 sol sol 258M Sep 11 13:34 lookup-tables/data/rvk.tsv
-rw-rw-r-- 1 sol sol 253M Jul 1 12:46 lookup-tables/data/rvk.tsv.20240507

Note that rvk.tsv.20240507 is not an automatically generated backup - there is no backup generated. It's just convenient to have something to compare to (and possibly a quick fallback to some state if really needed).

Closing.

[blackwinter]

Do I understand correctly that this is in a local directory named lookup-tables, not in the lookup-tables repository?

[dr0i]

yep -it's locally.