Standardizing and incentivizing the use of digital object identifiers (DOIs) to aggregate and identify both data analyzed and data generated by a research project will advance the field of astronomy to match best practices in other research fields like geosciences and medicine. Increase in the use of DOIs will prepare the discipline for changing expectations among funding agencies and publishers, who increasingly expect accurate and thorough data citation to accompany scientific outputs. The use of DOIs ensures a robust, sustainable, and interoperable approach to data citation in which due credit is given to researchers and institutions who produce and maintain the primary data. We describe in this work the advantages of DOIs for data citation and best practices for integrating a DOI service in an astronomical archive. We report on a pilot project carried out in collaboration with AAS Journals. During the course of the 1.5 year pilot, over 75% of submitting authors opted to use the integrated DOI service to clearly identify data analyzed during their research project when prompted at the time of paper submission.

The Proposal Auto-Categorizer and Manager (PACMan) tool was written to respond to concerns on subjective flaws and potential biases in some aspects of the proposal review process for time allocation for the {\it Hubble Space Telescope} (HST), and to partially alleviate some of the anticipated additional workload from the {\it James Webb Space Telescope} (JWST) proposal review. PACMan is essentially a mixed-method Naive Bayesian spam filtering routine, with multiple pools representing scientific categories, that utilizes the Robinson method for combining token (or word) probabilities. PACMan was trained to make similar programmatic decisions in science category sorting, panelist selection, and proposal-to-panelists assignments to those made by individuals and committees in the Science Policies Group (SPG) at Space Telescope Science Institute. Based on training from the previous cycle's proposals, PACMan made the same science category assignments for proposals in Cycle 24 as did the SPG, an average of 87\% of the time. Tests for similar science categorizations, based on training using proposals from additional cycles, show that this accuracy can be further improved, to the $>95\%$ level. This tool will be used to augment or replace key functions in the TAC review processes in future HST and JWST cycles.