Verification and reproducible curation of the BioModels repository is a dataset published in PLoS Computational Biology (2025). On theSindex it has a DataRank of 0, placing it in the top 100% of the data-sharing corpus. Its calibrated FAIR score is 69/100.
Ranks in the top 100% for downstream scientific impact
Linked data & code
DataRank reads this dataset's downstream impact straight off the citation graph — no black box, no proprietary weighting. How is this computed?
FAIR checklist signals are shown for context only and do not affect DataRank scoring.
Full FAIR picture · advisory
The headline score is computed from the scored criteria — the fact-shaped checks (a repository, an accession, a licence) that two independent models agree on. The advisory criteria below are real FAIR guidance but rest on judgment calls that models read differently, so they inform without moving the number.
“https://biomodels.org/”
The only identifier given is a URL, not a persistent identifier scheme (DOI, Handle, ARK, etc.).
RDA-F1-01D — FAIR Data Maturity Model: 'Data is identified by a persistent identifier' (priorit · RDA-F1-02D — FAIR Data Maturity Model: 'Data is identified by a globally unique identifier' · FsF-F1-02D — F-UJI/FAIRsFAIR: 'Data is assigned a persistent identifier'
“publicly available at https://biomodels.org/”
BioModels is a named repository listed in re3data/FAIRsharing. [majority verdict 'yes' (4/5 passes agreed)]
RDA-F4-01M — FAIR Data Maturity Model: metadata is offered so it can be harvested and indexed ( · NIH DMS Policy Element 4 (NOT-OD-21-014) — name the repository where data will be archived · NSTC Desirable Characteristics of Data Repositories (2022) — 'Long-Term Sustainability', 'Reten
“Data Availability The updated models and files referenced in this work are publicly available at https://biomodels.org/”
The dataset link appears only in the body text (data availability statement), not in the reference list.
FORCE11 Joint Declaration of Data Citation Principles (2014) — data should be cited as a first- · RDA-F3-01M — metadata clearly and explicitly includes the identifier of the data it describes · FsF-F3-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes the identifier of the data it describes'
Advisory · not in the published score
“The updated models and files referenced in this work are publicly available at https://biomodels.org/ and code supporting this study is available at https://github.com/sys-bio/temp-biomodels and https://github.com/biosimulations/biosimulations-runutils .”
The statement points to a repository (BioModels) and code repositories, which is a link to archived data in a public repository (Colavizza category 3). [majority verdict 'yes' (3/5 passes agreed)]
Colavizza, Hrynaszkiewicz, Staden, Whitaker & McGillivray (2020), 'The citation advantage of li · Springer Nature research data policy — Data Availability Statements: standard statement templat · RDA-F3-01M — metadata clearly and explicitly includes the identifier of the data it describes
“All 1073 curated entries retrieved from the BioModels database have been updated, with every file now checked for correctness or replaced.”
The dataset description is given in running prose rather than an itemised inventory (section, table, or list). [majority verdict 'partial' (4/5 passes agreed)]
RDA-F2-01M — 'Rich metadata is provided to allow discovery' (priority Essential) · FsF-F2-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes descriptive core elements to support data findability' · FsF-R1-01MD — F-UJI: 'Metadata specifies the content of the data'
“The updated models and files referenced in this work are publicly available at https://biomodels.org/”
The data are stated to be publicly available with no precondition.
RDA-A1.1-01D — 'Data is accessible through a free access protocol' · FsF-A1-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata contains access level and access conditions of the data' · NSTC Desirable Characteristics of Data Repositories (2022) — 'Free and Easy Access'
Advisory · not in the published score
“publicly available”
The paper labels the data as 'publicly available', which is an explicit access-level label.
FsF-A1-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata contains access level and access conditions of the data' · RDA-A1-01M — metadata contains information to enable the user to get access to the data · COAR Controlled Vocabularies — Access Rights v1.0 (open / embargoed / restricted / metadata-onl
The data are computational models and not sensitive human-subject data; no gatekeeper is mentioned.
NIH Genomic Data Sharing Policy (NOT-OD-14-124) — controlled-access via a Data Access Committee · RDA-A1.2-01D — 'Data is accessible through an access protocol that supports authentication and · NIH DMS Policy Element 5 (NOT-OD-21-014) — Access, Distribution, or Reuse Considerations (conse
“The updated models and files referenced in this work are publicly available at https://biomodels.org/”
The paper states the data are available now but does not mention how long they will persist. [majority verdict 'partial' (3/5 passes agreed)]
NIH DMS Plan Element 4 (NOT-OD-21-014) — Data Preservation, Access, and Associated Timelines · NSTC Desirable Characteristics (2022), Organizational Infrastructure: 'Retention Policy' · RDA-A2-01M — 'Metadata is guaranteed to remain available after data is no longer available'
“Systems Biology Markup Language (SBML)”
SBML, SED-ML, and HDF5 are open, non-proprietary community-standard formats.
FsF-R1.3-02D — F-UJI: 'Data is available in a file format recommended by the target research co · RDA-R1.3-02D — data is expressed in a machine-understandable community standard · RDA-I1-01D — data uses a knowledge representation expressed in a standardised format
Advisory · not in the published score
“Systems Biology Markup Language (SBML)”
The paper names SBML, SED-ML, MIRIAM, and KiSAO, all of which are community data/metadata standards. [majority verdict 'yes' (4/5 passes agreed)]
RDA-R1.3-01M — 'Metadata complies with a community standard' (priority Essential) · RDA-R1.3-01D — 'Data complies with a community standard' · RDA-I2-01M — '(Meta)data use vocabularies that follow FAIR principles'
The paper does not provide an identifier (DOI, accession, etc.) for any external resource its data depends on; it only gives bare names or general URLs. [majority verdict 'no' (3/5 passes agreed)]
RDA-I3-01M — '(meta)data include references to other (meta)data' · RDA-I3-03M — 'metadata includes qualified references to other metadata' · FsF-I3-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes links between the data and its related entities'
The paper does not state a reuse license for the data; the CC BY notice applies to the article only.
RDA-R1.1-01M — 'Metadata includes information about the licence under which the data can be reu · RDA-R1.1-02M — 'Metadata refers to a standard reuse licence' · RDA-R1.1-03M — 'Metadata refers to a machine-understandable reuse licence'
“we took a snapshot in time from June of 2024 of the curated branch of BioModels”
The paper provides a date (June 2024) as the snapshot reference, but no version token.
DataCite Metadata Schema 4.6 — the 'Version' property · RDA-R1.2-01M — provenance information (which version was used is provenance) · NSTC Desirable Characteristics of Data Repositories (2022) — 'Provenance', 'Retention Policy'
“code supporting this study is available at https://github.com/sys-bio/temp-biomodels and https://github.com/biosimulations/biosimulations-runutils”
The paper gives machine-resolvable GitHub URLs for the code.
NIH DMS Policy Element 2 (NOT-OD-21-014) — 'Related Tools, Software and/or Code' · FAIR4RS Principles v1.0 (Chue Hong et al., 2022; RDA/FORCE11/ReSA) — FAIR Principles for Resear · FORCE11 Software Citation Principles (Smith, Katz & Niemeyer, 2016, PeerJ CS 2:e86)
“NIH grant P41EB023912”
The paper provides specific grant numbers (P41EB023912, R24GM137787, 116030) attached to named funders.
DataCite Metadata Schema 4.6 — 'FundingReference' property (funderName, funderIdentifier, award · Crossref Funder Registry — canonical funder identifiers for funding metadata · RDA-F2-01M — rich metadata provided to allow discovery (funding is part of the descriptive reco
Advisory · not in the published score
“COPASI [25], Tellurium [26], VCell [27,28], PySCeS [29] and Amici [30]”— not found in the paper; verdict downgraded
The paper names specific simulation engines (COPASI, Tellurium, etc.) used to produce the data. [downgraded to 'partial' — no verifiable quote from the paper] [majority verdict 'partial' (3/5 passes agreed)]
RDA-R1.2-01M — 'Metadata includes provenance information according to community- specific standa · FsF-R1.2-01M — F-UJI: 'Metadata includes provenance information about data creation or generati · W3C PROV-O (W3C Recommendation, 2013) — the entity/activity/agent model of provenance
No separate documentation object (README, codebook, data dictionary) is mentioned as accompanying the data.
RDA-R1-01M — '(Meta)data are richly described with a plurality of accurate and relevant attribu · FsF-R1-01MD — F-UJI: 'Metadata specifies the content of the data' · NIH DMS Policy Element 3 (NOT-OD-21-014) — Standards (documentation and metadata to accompany t
Calibrated FAIR score — a parallel quality metric, independent of the DataRank citation score. See the full evaluation →
National Institutes of Health
Grant: P41EB023912
National Institutes of Health
Grant: R24GM137787
European Bioinformatics Institute
Grant: core
European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations
Grant: 116030
MeSH Terms