No, there isn't.
The most in-depth analysis that I'm aware of is the 2011 paper by Renear, Sacchi and Wickett, "Definitions of dataset in the scientific and technical literature", in which they decided that there were four basic concepts that reoccurred (grouping, content, relatedness, purpose), but weren't completely consistent when dealing with different communities.
There have been other attempts to deal with the term 'data', which has significantly different meaning in the hard sciences, information science, and commputer science communities. See for instance, Ballsun-Stanton's 2010 paper, "Asking about data: Experimental philosophy of Information Technology".
As it's been so difficult to get fixed definitions, a few years ago, Todd King and I attempted to collect terms that we saw as problematic when attempting to talk about data systems with folks from other science disciplines. As it's been stable for more than a year now, we should probably try to publish it. (I wanted to provide cross walks to terms in OAIS and other vocabularies, so I'm the one holding it up). We specifically gave up on trying to define 'dataset' :
Please note that the terms dataset, data product and data series are not defined here. Although all refer to a grouping of data granules, the terms are used inconsistently across disciplines; in solar physics, a dataset is a collection of data products while in earth sciences, a data product is either a collection of similar datasets or a classification of datasets. These terms should be avoided, or clearly defined when used.
There's also an effort going on right now through the Research Data Alliance as part of their Data Foundation and Terminology Workgroup to come up with an overall data model ... I haven't been following their work as much as I should (and I still need to look at the draft they sent me a couple of weeks ago), but they should be releasing something for their plenary meeting at the end of the month.