More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Open access

The openness of data platforms: a research agenda

Authors:

Mark de Reuver,

Wirawan Agahari,

Antragama Ewa Abbas,

Anneke ZuiderwijkAuthors Info & Claims

DE '22: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Data Economy

Pages 34 - 41

https://doi.org/10.1145/3565011.3569056

Published: 06 December 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Data platforms are the keystone of the data economy. When opened up, data platforms allow data owners, data consumers and third parties to interact. Yet, openness may also harm business and societal interests. Literature on platform openness does not cover data platforms, and data economy scholars rarely study platform openness. Therefore, this paper develops a research agenda on the openness of data platforms. We explore how data platforms differ from conventional digital platforms (e.g., software platforms). From those differentiating characteristics, we identify areas for future work: (1) The specific characteristics of data require reconceptualizing the object of platform openness; (2) New ways in which data platforms can be opened should be conceptualized; (3) As data platforms are tailored to specific industries, platform-to-platform openness should be a novel unit of analysis; (4) Because opening up data platforms create novel risks, new reasons to (not) open up data platforms should be studied.

References

[1]

Aleksi Ville Aaltonen, Cristina Alaimo, and Jannis Kallinikos. 2021. The making of data commodities: data analytics as an embedded process. Journal of Management Information Systems 38, 2 (August 2021), 401--429.

[2]

Antragama Ewa Abbas, Wirawan Agahari, Montijn Van de Ven, Anneke Zuiderwijk, and Mark De Reuver. 2021. Business Data Sharing through Data Marketplaces: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research 16, 7 (December 2021), 3321--3339.

[3]

Antragama Ewa Abbas, Hosea Ofe, M De Reuver, and Anneke Zuiderwijk. 2022. Preparing future business data sharing via meta-platform for data marketplaces. In 35th Bled eConference.

[4]

Wirawan Agahari and M De Reuver. 2022. Rethinking consumers' data sharing decisions with the emergence of multi-party computation: An experimental study. In ECIS 2022 Research-in-Progress Papers, Timisoara, Romania.

[5]

E. Almirall and R. Casadesus-Masanell. 2010. Open versus closed innovation: A model of discovery and divergence. Academy of Management Review 35, 1 (2010), 27--47.

[6]

Joey van Angeren, Carina Alves, and Slinger Jansen. 2016. Can we ask you to collaborate? Analyzing app developer relationships in commercial platform ecosystems. Journal of Systems and Software 113, (March 2016), 430--445.

Digital Library

[7]

M. Anvaari and S. Jansen. 2010. Evaluating Architectural Openness in Mobile Software Platforms. In Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Software Architecture: Companion, 85--92.

Digital Library

[8]

SA Azcoitia and N Laoutaris. 2022. A Survey of Data Marketplaces and Their Business Models. Retrieved September 22, 2022 from https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.04561

Digital Library

[9]

Alexander Benlian, Daniel Hilkert, and Thomas Hess. 2015. How open is this platform? The meaning and measurement of platform openness from the complementers' perspective. Journal of Information Technology 30, 3 (2015), 209--228.

[10]

Romy Bergman, Antragama Ewa Abbas, Sven Jung, Claudia Werker, and Mark De Reuver. 2022. Business model archetypes for data marketplaces in the automotive sector. Electronic Markets (2022).

[11]

Daniel Beverungen, Thomas Hess, Antonia Köster, and Christiane Lehrer. 2022. From private digital platforms to public data spaces: implications for the digital transformation. Electron Markets 32, 2 (June 2022), 493--501.

[12]

K. J. Boudreau. 2010. Open platform strategies and innovation: Granting access vs. devolving control. Management Science 56, 10 (2010), 1849--1872.

Digital Library

[13]

K. J. Boudreau. 2012. Let a thousand flowers bloom? An early look at large numbers of software app developers and patterns of innovation. Organization Science 23, 5 (2012), 1409--1427.

Digital Library

[14]

Kevin J. Boudreau. 2010. Open Platform Strategies and Innovation: Granting Access vs. Devolving Control. Management Science 56, 10 (October 2010), 1849--1872.

Digital Library

[15]

Sabine Brunswicker and Aaron Schecter. 2019. Coherence or flexibility? The paradox of change for developers' digital innovation trajectory on open platforms. Research Policy 48, 8 (October 2019), 103771.

[16]

Maja Hojer Bruun, Astrid Oberborbeck Andersen, and Adrienne Mannov. 2020. Infrastructures of trust and distrust: The politics and ethics of emerging cryptographic technologies. Anthropology Today 36, 2 (2020), 13--17.

[17]

B. Bygstad. 2017. Generative Innovation: A Comparison of Lightweight and Heavyweight IT. Journal of Information Technology 32, 2 (2017), 180--193.

[18]

Marco Ceccagnoli, Chris Forman, Peng Huang, and D. J. Wu. 2012. Cocreation of Value in a Platform Ecosystem! The Case of Enterprise Software. MIS Quarterly 36, 1 (2012), 263--290.

[19]

Javier Cenamor and Johan Frishammar. 2021. Openness in platform ecosystems: Innovation strategies for complementary products. Research Policy 50, 1 (January 2021), 104148.

[20]

C. Cennamo and J. Santaló. 2013. Platform competition: Strategic trade-offs in platform markets. Strategic Management Journal 34, 11 (2013), 1331--1350.

[21]

Carmelo Cennamo and Juan Santaló. 2019. Generativity Tension and Value Creation in Platform Ecosystems. Organization Science 30, 3 (May 2019), 617--641.

Digital Library

[22]

Goya Choi, Changi Nam, and Seongcheol Kim. 2019. The impacts of technology platform openness on application developers' intention to continuously use a platform: From an ecosystem perspective. Telecommunications Policy 43, 2 (March 2019), 140--153.

Digital Library

[23]

Goya Choi, Changi Nam, Seongcheol Kim, Hyun Ju Jung, and Chul Ho Lee. 2020. Where does knowledge-sharing motivation come from? The case of third-party developer in mobile platforms. Journal of Knowledge Management 24, 7 (January 2020), 1681--1704.

[24]

G. Choia, C. Nam, and S. Kim. 2017. The Impacts of Mobile Platform Openness on Application Devel-opers' Intention to Continuously Use a Platform: From an Ecosystem Perspective. Passau, Germany. Retrieved from https://www.econstor.eu/handle/10419/169455

[25]

Jörg Claussen, Tobias Kretschmer, and Philip Mayrhofer. 2013. The Effects of Rewarding User Engagement: The Case of Facebook Apps. Information Systems Research 24, 1 (March 2013), 186--200.

Digital Library

[26]

Panos Constantinides, Ola Henfridsson, and Geoffrey G. Parker. 2018. Introduction---Platforms and Infrastructures in the Digital Age. Information Systems Research 29, 2 (June 2018), 381--400.

Digital Library

[27]

Michael A. Cusumano and A. Gawer. 2002. The Elements of Platform Leadership. MIT Sloan Management Review 43, 3 (2002), 51.

[28]

V Dal Bianco, Varvana Myllärniemi, M Komssi, and M Raatikainen. 2014. The Role of Platform Boundary Resources in Software Ecosystems: A Case Study. Retrieved September 21, 2022 from https://ieeexplore-ieee-org.tudelft.idm.oclc.org/abstract/document/6827094

Digital Library

[29]

M. De Reuver and J. Ondrus. 2017. When technological superiority is not enough: The struggle to impose the SIM card as the NFC Secure Element for mobile payment platforms. Telecommu-nications Policy 41, 4 (2017), 253--262.

Digital Library

[30]

M De Reuver, C Sørensen, and R C Basole. 2018. The digital platform: A research agenda. Journal of Information Technology 33, 2 (2018), 124--135.

[31]

Thomas R. Eisenmann, Geoffrey Parker, and Marshall W. Van Alstyne. 2009. Opening Platforms: How, When and Why? In Platforms, market and innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., 131--162.

[32]

Thomas R. Eisenmann, Geoffrey Parker, and Marshall W Van Alstyne. 2006. Strategies for two-sided markets. Harvard business review 84, 10 (2006), 92.

[33]

Thomas R. Eisenmann, Geoffrey Parker, and Marshall W. Van Alstyne. 2009. Opening Platforms: How, When and Why? In Gawer, A. (eds) Platforms, market and innovation. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd., 131--162.

[34]

Martin Engert, Julia Evers, Andreas Hein, and Helmut Krcmar. 2022. The Engagement of Complementors and the Role of Platform Boundary Resources in e-Commerce Platform Ecosystems. Inf Syst Front (January 2022).

[35]

European Commission. 2020. The European Data Strategy. Retrieved December 13, 2021 from https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/fs_20_283

[36]

Samuel A. Fricker and Yuliyan V. Maksimov. 2017. Pricing of Data Products in Data Marketplaces. In Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, Karl Werder, Arto Ojala and Helena Holmström Olsson (eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 49--66.

[37]

Annabelle Gawer. 2014. Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework. Research Policy 43, 7 (2014), 1239--1249.

[38]

Selam Abrham Gebregiorgis and Jörn Altmann. 2015. IT Service Platforms: Their Value Creation Model and the Impact of their Level of Openness on their Adoption. Procedia Computer Science 68, (January 2015), 173--187.

[39]

A. Ghazawneh and O. Henfridsson. 2015. A paradigmatic analysis of digital application marketplac-es. Journal of Information Technology 30, 3 (2015), 198--208.

[40]

Ahmad Ghazawneh and Ola Henfridsson. 2013. Balancing platform control and external contribution in third-party development: the boundary resources model. Information Systems Journal 23, 2 (2013), 173--192.

Digital Library

[41]

Ahmad Ghazawneh and Ola Henfridsson. 2013. Balancing platform control and external contribution in third-party development: The boundary resources model. Information Systems Journal 23, 2 (2013), 173--192.

Digital Library

[42]

Tobias Goldbach, Viktoria Kemper, and Alexander Benlian. 2014. Mobile Application Quality and Platform Stickiness under Formal vs. Self-Control---Evidence from an Experimental Study. Auckland.

[43]

Robert Wayne Gregory, Ola Henfridsson, Evgeny Kaganer, and Harris Kyriakou. 2022. Data Network Effects: Key Conditions, Shared Data, and the Data Value Duality. AMR 47, 1 (January 2022), 189--192.

[44]

R Gulati, P Puranam, and M Tushman. 2012. Meta-organization design: Rethinking design in interorganizational and community contexts. Strategic Management Journal 33, 6 (2012), 571--586.

[45]

Andrei Hagiu and Julian Wright. 2015. Multi-Sided Platforms. International Journal of Industrial Organization 43, (2015), 162--174.

[46]

Daniel Heinz, Carina Benz, Marcel Fassnacht, and Gerhard Satzger. 2022. Past, Present and Future of Data Ecosystems Research: A Systematic Literature Review. 19.

[47]

Ola Henfridsson, Joe Nandhakumar, Harry Scarbrough, and Nikiforos Panourgias. 2018. Recombination in the open-ended value landscape of digital innovation. Information and Organization 28, 2 (June 2018), 89--100.

[48]

Susan Hilbolling, Hans Berends, Fleur Deken, and Philipp Tuertscher. 2020. Complementors as connectors: managing open innovation around digital product platforms. R&D Management 50, 1 (2020), 18--30.

[49]

Matthias Jarke, Boris Otto, and S Ram. 2019. Data sovereignty and data space ecosystems. Business & Information Systems Engineering 61, 5 (2019), 549--550.

[50]

Kimmo Karhu, Robin Gustafsson, and Kalle Lyytinen. 2018. Exploiting and defending open digital platforms with boundary resources: Android's five platform forks. Information Systems Research 29, 2 (2018), 479--497.

Digital Library

[51]

Kimmo Karhu and Paavo Ritala. 2021. Slicing the cake without baking it: Opportunistic platform entry strategies in digital markets. Long Range Planning 54, 5 (October 2021), 101988.

[52]

S. Khanagha, S. Ansari, S. Paroutis, and L. Oviedo. 2020. Mutualism and the dynamics of new platform creation: A study of cisco and fog computing. Strategic Management Journal 43, (2020), 476--506.

[53]

S. Koch and M. Kerschbaum. 2014. Joining a smartphone ecosystem: Application developers' moti-vations and decision criteria. Information and Software Technology 56, 11 (2014), 1423--1435.

[54]

Pantelis Koutroumpis, Aija Leiponen, and Llewellyn D W Thomas. 2020. Markets for data. Industrial and Corporate Change 29, 3 (June 2020), 645--660.

[55]

F Lauf, S Scheider, J Bartsch, P Herrmann, M Radic, M Rebbert, A.T. Nemat, C Schlueter Langdon, R Konrad, and A Sunyaev. 2022. Linking Data Sovereignty and Data Economy: Arising Areas of Tension.

[56]

Changjun Lee, Daeho Lee, and Junseok Hwang. 2015. Platform openness and the productivity of content providers: A meta-frontier analysis. Telecommunications Policy 39, 7 (August 2015), 553--562.

Digital Library

[57]

Karan Menon, Hannu Kärkkäinen, and Thorsten Wuest. 2020. Industrial internet platform provider and end-user perceptions of platform openness impacts. Industry and Innovation 27, 4 (April 2020), 363--389.

[58]

Jan Mikolon, David Hoffmann, Malte Greulich, and Matthias Werner. 2019. To row together or paddel one's own canoe? Simulating strategies to spur digital platform growth. Retrieved from https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2019_rp/75

[59]

J Mineraud, O Mazhelis, X Su, and S Tarkoma. 2016. A gap analysis of Internet-of-Things platforms. Computer Communications 89--90, (2016), 5--16.

Digital Library

[60]

Lars Mosterd, Vladimir C.M. Sobota, Geerten van de Kaa, Aaron Yi Ding, and Mark de Reuver. 2021. Context dependent trade-offs around platform-to-platform openness: The case of the Internet of Things. Technovation 108, (December 2021), 102331.

[61]

Tomasz Mucha and Timo Seppala. 2020. Artificial Intelligence Platforms --- A New Research Agenda for Digital Platform Economy. Social Science Research Network, Rochester, NY.

[62]

M F Niculescu, D J Wu, and L Xua. 2018. Strategic Intellectual Property Sharing: Competition on an Open Technology Platform Under Network Effects. Information Systems Research 29, 2 (2018), 498--519.

Digital Library

[63]

Fatemeh Nikayin, M De Reuver, and Timo Itälä. 2013. Collective action for a common service platform for independent living services. International journal of medical informatics 82, 10 (2013), 922--939.

[64]

Hosea Ofe, M De Reuver, B Nederstigt, and M.F.W.H.A. Janssen. 2023. Data Analytics Platforms: Value Propositions and Adoption Challenges for Small Hospitality Businesses.

[65]

Jan Ondrus, Avinash Gannamaneni, and Kalle Lyytinen. 2015. The impact of openness on the market potential of multi-sided platforms: A case study of mobile payment platforms. Journal of Information Technology 30, 3 (September 2015), 260--275.

[66]

Boris Otto and Matthias Jarke. 2019. Designing a multi-sided data platform: findings from the International Data Spaces case. Electron Markets 29, 4 (December 2019), 561--580.

[67]

G. Parker, M. Van Alstyne, and X. Jiang. 2017. Platform Ecosystems: How Developers Invert the Firm. MIS Quarterly 41, 1 (2017), 255--266.

Digital Library

[68]

Geoffrey Parker and Marshall W. Van Alstyne. 2018. Innovation, Openness, and Platform Control. Management Science 64, 7 (2018), 3015--3032.

[69]

Bryan Pon, Timo Seppälä, and Martin Kenney. 2014. Android and the demise of operating system-based power: Firm strategy and platform control in the post-PC world. Telecommunications Policy 38, 11 (December 2014), 979--991.

Digital Library

[70]

Fabian de Prieëlle, G. A. de Reuver, and J. Rezaei. 2020. The Role of Ecosystem Data Governance in Adoption of Data Platforms by Internet-of-Things Data Providers: Case of Dutch Horticulture Industry. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management Early Access, (2020).

[71]

Mark de Reuver, Harry Bouwman, Guillermo Prieto, and Alex Visser. 2011. Governance of flexible mobile service platforms. Futures 43, 9 (November 2011), 979--985.

[72]

Mark de Reuver, Edgar Verschuur, Fatemeh Nikayin, Narciso Cerpa, and Harry Bouwman. 2015. Collective action for mobile payment platforms: A case study on collaboration issues between banks and telecom operators. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 14, 5 (September 2015), 331--344.

Digital Library

[73]

Jean-Charles Rochet and Jean Tirole. 2003. Platform competition in two-sided markets. Journal of the european economic association 1, 4 (2003), 990--1029.

[74]

Fatemeh Saadatmand, Rikard Lindgren, and Ulrike Schultze. 2019. Configurations of platform organizations: Implications for complementor engagement. Research Policy 48, 8 (October 2019), 103770.

[75]

T. Saarikko. 2016. Platform Provider by Accident: A Case Study of Digital Platform Coring. Busi-ness & Information Systems Engineering 58, 3 (2016), 177--191.

[76]

Maximilian Schreieck, Manuel Wiesche, and Helmut Krcmar. 2021. Capabilities for value co-creation and value capture in emergent platform ecosystems: A longitudinal case study of SAP's cloud platform. Journal of Information Technology 36, 4 (December 2021), 365--390.

[77]

David Soto Setzke, Markus Böhm, and Helmut Krcmar. 2019. Platform Openness: A Systematic Literature Review and Avenues for Future Research. Wirtschaftsinformatik 2019 Proceedings (March 2019). Retrieved from https://aisel.aisnet.org/wi2019/track07/papers/9

[78]

M Spiekermann. 2019. Data Marketplaces: Trends and Monetisation of Data Goods. Intereconomics 54, 4 (2019), 208--216.

[79]

Mark C. Suchman. 1995. Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. AMR 20, 3 (July 1995), 571--610.

[80]

Karl Taeuscher and Hannes Rothe. 2021. Optimal distinctiveness in platform markets: Leveraging complementors as legitimacy buffers. Strategic Management Journal 42, 2 (2021), 435--461.

[81]

B. Tan, S. Pan, X. Lu, and L. Huang. 2015. The Role of IS Capabilities in the Development of Multi-Sided Platforms: The Digital Ecosystem Strategy of Alibaba.com. Journal of the Association for Information Systems 16, 4 (2015), 248--280.

[82]

David Tilson, Kalle Lyytinen, and Carsten Sørensen. 2010. Digital infrastructures: The missing IS research agenda. Information Systems Research 21, 4 (December 2010), 748--759.

Digital Library

[83]

Amrit Tiwana. 2013. Plattform Ecosystems: Aligning Architecture, Governance and Strategy. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Burlington, MA.

[84]

Amrit Tiwana, Benn Konsynski, and Ashley A. Bush. 2010. Platform evolution: Coevolution of platform architecture, governance, and environmental dynamics. Information Systems Research 21, 4 (December 2010), 675--687.

Digital Library

[85]

C.-L. Tsai. 2018. The timing of fostering complementary innovation: Exploring the antecedent of in-dustry platform emergence. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 30, 10 (2018), 1121--1135.

[86]

Simon Den Uijl. 2015. The emergence of de-facto standards.

[87]

Marshall W. Van Alstyne and Alisa Lenart. 2020. Using data and respecting users. Commun. ACM 63, 11 (October 2020), 28--30.

Digital Library

[88]

Marshall W. Van Alstyne, Georgios Petropoulos, Geoffrey Parker, and Bertin Martens. 2021. "In situ" data rights. Commun. ACM 64, 12 (December 2021), 34--35.

Digital Library

[89]

Fernando N Van der Vlist and Anne Helmond. 2021. How partners mediate platform power: Mapping business and data partnerships in the social media ecosystem. Big Data & Society 8, 1 (January 2021), 20539517211025060.

[90]

B Van Loenen, Anneke Zuiderwijk, G Vancauwenberghe, FJ Lopez-Pellicer, I Mulder, C Alexopoulos, R Magnussen, M Saddiqa, M Dulong de Rosnay, J Crompvoets, A Polini, B Re, and C Casiano Flores. Towards value-creating and sustainable open data ecosystems: A comparative case study and a research agenda. eJournal of eDemocracy and Open Government (JeDEM) 13, 2.

[91]

N. Venkatraman and C.-H. Lee. 2004. Preferential linkage and network evolution: A conceptual model and empirical test in the U.S. video game sector. Academy of Management Journal 47, 6 (2004), 876--892.

[92]

Jonathan Wareham, Paul B. Fox, and Josep Lluís Cano Giner. 2014. Technology Ecosystem Governance. Organization Science 25, 4 (August 2014), 1195--1215.

Digital Library

[93]

Niklas Weiss, Manuel Wiesche, Maximilian Schreieck, and Helmut Krcmar. 2020. Learning to be a Platform Owner: How BMW Enhances App Development for Cars. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management Early Access, (2020).

[94]

M. Wessel, F. Thies, and A. Benlian. 2017. Opening the Floodgates: The Implications of Increasing Platform Openness in Crowdfunding. Journal of Information Technology 32, 4 (2017), 344--360.

[95]

J West. 2003. How open is open enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies. Research Policy 32, 7 (2003), 1259--1285.

[96]

J West. 2003. How open is open enough? Melding proprietary and open source platform strategies. Research Policy 32, 7 (2003), 1259--1285.

[97]

Michael A. Zaggl, Tim G. Schweisfurth, and Cornelius Herstatt. 2020. The Dynamics of Openness and the Role of User Communities: A Case Study in the Ecosystem of Open Source Gaming Handhelds. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 67, 3 (August 2020), 712--723.

Cited By

Degen KTeubner T(2024)Wallet wars or digital public infrastructure? Orchestrating a digital identity data ecosystem from a government perspectiveElectronic Markets10.1007/s12525-024-00731-134:1Online publication date: 3-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-024-00731-1
Petrik DUntermann ABaars H(2024)Functional Requirements for Enterprise Data Catalogs: A Systematic Literature ReviewSoftware Business10.1007/978-3-031-53227-6_1(3-18)Online publication date: 9-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53227-6_1
Novák VStoces MKovár LUlman MJarolímek JMasner JKubata KKánská E(2023)Platform to Decision-Making in Sustainable Tourism and Landscape Protection Based on Signal Detection2023 IEEE International Workshop on Metrology for Agriculture and Forestry (MetroAgriFor)10.1109/MetroAgriFor58484.2023.10424374(794-799)Online publication date: 6-Nov-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/MetroAgriFor58484.2023.10424374

Index Terms

The openness of data platforms: a research agenda
1. Applied computing
  1. Enterprise computing
    1. IT governance
2. Information systems
  1. Data management systems
    1. Database management system engines

Recommendations

Making data platforms smarter with MOSES
Abstract
The rise of data platforms has enabled the collection and processing of huge volumes of data, but has opened to the risk of losing their control. Collecting proper metadata about raw data and transformations can significantly reduce ...
Highlights
- MOSES is a framework for metadata handling in big data platforms. MOSES provides a wide range of functionalities to different types of users of the platform.
The impacts of technology platform openness on application developers’ intention to continuously use a platform: From an ecosystem perspective
Abstract
With the development of information and communication technologies and Internet of things, the open-platform strategy has come into the spotlight. Opening a platform allows external firms or individuals to enter the platform ecosystem ...
Highlights
- The open-platform strategy has come into the spotlight.
- Opening a platform ...
Self-Organizing Maps for Data Purchase Support in Data Marketplaces
Computational Collective Intelligence
Abstract
Data marketplaces have become popular in recent years, in particular for enterprises who want to enrich their own data with novel data from outside in order to improve their decision-making. A data marketplace is a platform that brings data ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

DE '22: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Data Economy

December 2022

70 pages

ISBN:9781450399234

DOI:10.1145/3565011

Conference Chairs:
Nikos Laoutaris
IMDEA
,
Marco Mellia
Politecnico di Torino

Copyright © 2022 Owner/Author.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

Sponsors

SIGCOMM: ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 06 December 2022

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Funding Sources

European Research Council

Conference

CoNEXT '22

Sponsor:

SIGCOMM

CoNEXT '22: The 18th International Conference on emerging Networking EXperiments and Technologies

December 9, 2022

Rome, Italy

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
969
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)496
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)107

Reflects downloads up to 09 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Degen KTeubner T(2024)Wallet wars or digital public infrastructure? Orchestrating a digital identity data ecosystem from a government perspectiveElectronic Markets10.1007/s12525-024-00731-134:1Online publication date: 3-Oct-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-024-00731-1
Petrik DUntermann ABaars H(2024)Functional Requirements for Enterprise Data Catalogs: A Systematic Literature ReviewSoftware Business10.1007/978-3-031-53227-6_1(3-18)Online publication date: 9-Feb-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-53227-6_1
Novák VStoces MKovár LUlman MJarolímek JMasner JKubata KKánská E(2023)Platform to Decision-Making in Sustainable Tourism and Landscape Protection Based on Signal Detection2023 IEEE International Workshop on Metrology for Agriculture and Forestry (MetroAgriFor)10.1109/MetroAgriFor58484.2023.10424374(794-799)Online publication date: 6-Nov-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/MetroAgriFor58484.2023.10424374

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents