Universitätsklinikum Essen RCCResearch Compute Cluster
Documentation online My RCC · not yet released
Browse documentation

Reference · RCC ClusterDocs

Publications, acknowledging, and citing RCC

Research publications are one of the clearest ways to show what RCC enables. If RCC compute, project storage, scientific software, data-transfer services, or operational support materially contributed to a scholarly publication, RCC requires both acknowledgement and citation of the infrastructure contribution.

Publication-credit requirement

For a scholarly publication materially enabled by RCC, authors must do both of the following:

  1. Acknowledge RCC in the Methods or Acknowledgements section.
  2. Cite the canonical RCC infrastructure lineage paper in the bibliography.

This requirement is based on material RCC contribution. Having an RCC account by itself does not mean a paper used RCC.

Required acknowledgement

Use this wording in the Methods or Acknowledgements section:

Computational resources and services were provided by the Research Compute Cluster (RCC) at University Hospital Essen.

Keep the stable name Research Compute Cluster (RCC) in the text. Consistent wording makes RCC-supported publications easier to identify without relying on author names alone.

Required infrastructure citation

The current canonical published infrastructure citation is:

Schmidt, Hendrik F. R.; Schlötterer, Jörg; Bargull, Marcel; Nasca, Enrico; Aydelott, Ryan; Seifert, Christin; Meyer, Folker. Towards a Trustworthy, Secure and Reliable Enclave for Machine Learning in a Hospital Setting: The Essen Medical Computing Platform (EMCP). 2021 IEEE Third International Conference on Cognitive Machine Intelligence (CogMI), pp. 116–123. DOI: 10.1109/CogMI52975.2021.00023.

EMCP is the published architectural precursor to RCC. This paper remains the required RCC infrastructure citation until a dedicated published RCC methods or infrastructure paper is formally designated. Do not substitute an unpublished manuscript as the required bibliographic citation.

Current RCC publication archive

The RCC website will carry the current reviewed list under Publications; the public RCC website is not yet released, so the link may not resolve until RCC announces it.

The initial historical seed contains 32 Folker Meyer scholarly outputs from 2020 through 2026. The seed uses the exact Folker Meyer scholarly identity for discovery and was explicitly approved as a bounded historical import. Thirty entries are published; two very recent August 2026 Frontiers papers already have DOI records but are labelled accepted until final publication. Correction notices stay attached to the parent paper rather than being counted as additional publications.

This seed is not a rule that every paper by an RCC user automatically belongs in the RCC archive. New publications follow the ordinary project-attribution and review workflow below.

After your paper is published

Keep these two pieces of information together:

  • the DOI or PMID of the publication;
  • the RCC project name that supported the work.

Then provide them through your normal RCC project contact. This lets the RCC team attribute the publication to the correct project and include it in reviewed institutional impact reporting.

If several RCC projects or facilities contributed, add a short note describing that relationship rather than choosing one project arbitrarily.

Why RCC asks for this

Publication reporting is intended to form a closed loop:

  1. researchers acknowledge RCC and cite the canonical infrastructure paper;
  2. the DOI/PMID becomes a publication candidate;
  3. the candidate is associated with the relevant RCC project;
  4. the attribution is reviewed;
  5. only an accepted record enters RCC impact and reporting views.

Automated literature discovery may help find publications that users forget to report, but search results are candidates only. They are not accepted automatically. An RCC account appearing in an author list is not enough evidence by itself that RCC contributed to that paper.

This model prevents the reporting system from guessing project ownership later and makes annual reports, funding evidence, project summaries, and institutional statistics traceable back to a reviewed publication record.

What if I used another core facility too?

Acknowledge each contributing facility according to its own policy. For example, an IMCES-assisted study may need both the RCC acknowledgement and the appropriate IMCES/instrument funding acknowledgement. These describe different contributions and should not be collapsed into one generic infrastructure sentence.

What changes later?

A future My RCC publication-reporting workflow may let users submit DOI/PMID and project attribution directly. Until that workflow is implemented and enabled, this documentation deliberately does not claim that a publication-submission form exists.