Disaster Lifecycle I
ESIP Disaster Lifecyle Cluster is to facilitate connections and coordinate efforts among data providers, managers and developers of disaster response systems and tools, and end-user communities within ESIP. We are establishing a testbed called Collaborative Common Operating Picture (C-COP) to facilitate sharing and validation of data products and tools that will benefit every phase of disaster lifecyle. This session will give an overview of the testbed, demonstrate use of example products and tools shared on the platform, and describe how products and tools can be contributed to C-COP. We will also hear more about the GEOSS Architecture Implementation Pilot and activities involving the GEOSS Disasters Societal Benefit area, and we can discuss opportunities for future collaborations.
Dave Jones/StormCenter Inc.
Maggi Glasscoe/NASA JPL
Discussion on the new ESIP sponsored testbed: concept, status, initial experience on how the testbed works, followed by discussion on testbed activities for 2015.
9:30 – 9:50 am ET
Bart De Lathouwer/OGC
Discussion on related architecture pilot activities for GEOSS and the Disasters Societal Benefit area
Testbed wrap up discussion for 2015 plans
Emily Law/NASA JPL, Karen Moe/NASA ESTO, and all
<Sean Barberie's Notes>
Disasters Lifecycle I
· Introduction by Dave Jones
· Established a platform to access and share geospatial data
· Accelerate a collaborative approach to reviewing and testing geospatial products within ESIP
· Establish Test Folders
· Identify Partner Datasets (e.g. E-Decider, NOAA, U of Alabama Huntsville)
o What are the characteristics for the types of data sets we want for this platform?
· Test datasets for display
· Apply successful datasets to “ESIP Trusted Data” Folder
o Vision: have ESIP Trusted Data available to emergency response organizations any time and quickly available after a disaster.
· On-Line help available for adding datasets.
o Need to determine initial credentialed leaders.
· Conducts prototype product evaluation session on telecons.
· Q: How do we establish criteria for evaluating different data sets when determining what is ESIP Trusted Data?
· A: The disaster lifecycle cluster will come up with the criteria that we will use to determine whether a data set is ESIP Trusted Data. We can use different levels to display a seal of approval for a given data set: i.e. Trusted Data Level 1, Trusted Data Level 2, etc.
· Anne Rosinski comment: thinks we’re on the right track but wants to push us to go further. GIS data: in a disaster, geospatial data is not the only data that is important for disaster management. Each organization builds its own operational picture using their own platform (e.g. EPA uses their own system). We need two-way information exchange between the systems. It is important to take data from multiple sources and use it to build our own custom tool and to give our users the ability to build their own product. Described Exchange Core disaster management software as an example.
· Dave Jones: the disaster lifecycle group is primarily to evaluate and prototype data products and not to necessarily produce a final end-user product.
· Ken UAH: It is possible that terms that we are using are causing some confusion. The focus is on the common operating data and not necessarily on the common operation picture. Since the focus of the disasters lifecycle is data availability.
· Begin presentation: Margaret Glasscoe
· E-Decider is a decision support platform that uses remote sensing and geospatial data to create products for decision makers.
· Geogateway is a analysis gateway for scientific discovery and disaster response.
· Web-based and map-enabled.
· Can incorporate NASA UAV SAR for surface deformation (from the look of the maps this might have been InSAR).
· This was tested during the Napa Earthquake in California.
· Work with CA Earthquake Clearinghouse
· Dave Jones
· Showing what the interface will look like for the Disaster Lifecycle testbed.
· Karen: Exciting developments. But we may need to know a little bit more about the criteria used by the end-users to evaluate the data and the needs of the customers.
· Bart De Lathouwer: Open Geospatial Consortium
· Presentation on Architecture Implementation Pilots (AIP)
· AIP is an agile, evolutionary development process, that proves the maturity of the infrastructure components.
· AIP phase 7.
· Jan 27th will be the call for participation for AIP-8 with a meeting in Virginia on March 23rd in Norfolk VA.
· See slide figure for societal benefit areas (SBAs)
· Focus on using open standards.
· AIP-7 Results: GEOSS Water Services, 24 hour flood prediction. In collaboration with the Disaster Management and Agriculture SBAs. World-wide participation. WaterML2.
· Crowd sourcing for disasters management: Open GeoSocial API (NASA)
· How can the GEOSS portal interact with community portals?
o Can this be a two-way street where both portals build off each other?
· AIP-8 is focused on mobile apps and web applications.
<Ken Keiser's Notes>
- Maggie Glascoe
- Bill Teng
- Sean Barbarie - student intern
- Chris Mattman
- several others...
- Dave Jones
- Anne Rosiniski - earthquake clearinghouse
- Bart De Lathouwer
- Karen Moe
- Dan Keyes
- Kevin Ward
- Sean Barberle
- Stu Frye
- Svetla Hirstova-Veleva
- Dave Jones - collaborative common operating picture testbed
- current constraints
- isolated data
- complex tools
- limited interaction
- GeoCollaborate integrates
- Real-time Decision Support for
- crisis management
- establish a platform to access and share geospatial data
- accelerate collaborative approach
- establish test folders
- identify partner datasets (Edecider, NOAA, UAH, others…)
- test datasets for display
- apply successful “trusted" datasets
- Emily - what are the requirements to turn a test product into a “trusted” dataset? - up to the group at this point to make those decisions and eventually engaging customers/communities to give that feedback, working to define a “seal of approval” approach that can be assigned to the trusted datasets
- Anne - pointing out that geospatial data is not the only data important for decisions, need to have general COP datasets that multiple systems can access and utilize - requesting that the focus be on COP “data” as opposed to application - making the data interoperable. - Dave agrees that common data is the goal.
- Maggie Glascoe - JPL E-Decider and GeoGateway
- note that Marlon Pierce at Indiana is involved with this project
- Earthquake response case studies
- ? how are event notifications received?
- Bill - question about resolution of data
- Ken - question about event notifications - using USGS earthquake notifications for event trigger
- Dave Jones - demonstration of “GeoSync” - GeoCollaborate level 1
- using E-Decider example of earthquake in CA
- demo Storm Centers GeoCollaborate COP tool
- has concept of “leader” who is doing work
- and “followers” who can watch/monitor what the leader is doing
- master-slave display concept
- Karen - look at how the cluster can evaluate this functionality - how to get more common data products in to the system
- (email question to Dave) is this an open source tool? - No, but can be available for testing
- Bart De Lathouwer - OGC (in Dublin) - Architecture Implementation Pilots (AIP)
- pilots for GEOSS Common Infrastructure (GCI)
- uses in-kind contributions
- preparing for AIP phase 8 - call in January 2015
- disaster areas
- water (drought / flood)
- SPS - sensor planning service - sensor tasking - ISERV?
- AIP 7 was focused on water services - flooding primarily
- used crowd sourcing in situ for disaster management
- Open GeoSocial API (NASA - Stu?)
- SSO (single sign-on) was important to facilitate users
- explored moving functionality to data in the web
- AIP 8 - focus on light, web or mobile apps using GEOSS resources
- Emily - clarifying that AIP 8 is focusing on web and mobile apps
- Bill - question about whether social media input is participatory or being harvested - some of both. Bill comment that geolocation is hard when harvesting.