Web Survey Synthesis NSF CyberGIS Requirements Workshop Prepared by University of Washington Participatory GIS Technology (PGIST) Research Team Washington, DC | February 2, 2011

Survey Respondents (19)Organization Bill Appelbe (CyberGIS) Victorian Partnership for Advanced Computing XuanShi (CyberGIS) Georgia Tech Chris Renschler U. Buffalo RangaRajuVatsavai (CyberGIS) Oakridge National Research Lab ChaitanBaru San Diego State U. Shaowen Wang (CyberGIS) U. Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Tim Nyerges (CyberGIS) U. Washington Serge Rey (CyberGIS) Arizona State LeysiaPalen U. Colorado 1/19

Survey Respondents (19)Organization Sean Ahearn City U. New York, Hunter College Bob Freitag U. Washington Yan Liu (CyberGIS) U. Illinois at Urbana-Champaign BudhendraBhaduri (CyberGIS) Oakridge National Research Lab Nina Lam Louisiana State U. ThomasCova U. Utah Andrew Curtis U.Southern California Piotr Jankowski San Diego State U. May Yuan U. Oklahoma Michael Hodgson U. South Carolina 2/19

Analysis/DataIntegrationInteraction PreparednessResponseRecoveryMitigation EM PhasesGeneral Capabilities 3/19 Two Frameworks for Content Analysis/Synthesis

Q1: What policy and scientific questions for emergency management (EM) are to be addressed that have not been adequately addressed in the policy and scientific literature? EM Phases Emergency intelligence production and sharing Links between hazards and receptors through process scale and affect on overall understanding of disaster impacts Preparedness More accurate prediction of flood levels from upstream events, real-time forecasts of wind shifts Emergency alerts for rapid flood events, wind shifts Dynamic adjustment of measures based on real time information Evacuation and utilities capacity design Vulnerability identification and linkage to protective plans Simulators, training tools for prediction (disaster impacts and occurrence) Representation and communication of uncertainty “How do you define, quantify, model, and communicate extreme events and community resilience to be able to assess, plan for and enhance communities against extreme events?” 4/19

Q1: What policy and scientific questions for emergency management (EM) are to be addressed that have not been adequately addressed in the policy and scientific literature? EM Phases Response Affect of spatio-temporal-attribute scale on inter-organizational situation awareness Methods and techniques needed by first responders to manage impacts Collection and provision of remote sensing data from a policy (responsibility) & science (speed) perspective Recovery Alternative futures simulation Infrastructure design for quick recovery Community disaster resilience and how supported by policies and methods Fine-scale spatial patterning and influence Mitigation (While aspects of preparedness mitigate impacts – hazard mitigation as such was not addressed) 5/19

Q1: What policy and scientific questions for emergency management (EM) are to be addressed that have not been adequately addressed in the policy and scientific literature? General Capabilities Analysis/Data Affect of software capabilities on quality/performance of EM Scales of space-time data needed at different EM phases within both different regional and disaster contexts Computational methods for decision-making (high &multi-level resolution) Science-based cost-benefit analysis Tradeoff between data quality and usability/effectiveness in time critical situations Best methods for updating key baseline datasets following disaster Opportunities and limits to VGI Interaction Use of volunteer-contributed on-site info, public as information source (enablement) Dynamic, collaborative decision-making in crises Rapid deployment of information Integration Alignment/verification/integration of multiple sources of information (formal/informal) Regional compatibility of GIS Linking physical process models with human behavioral models 6/19

Q2: Which of the CyberGIS capabilities listed is the Software Elements table can address the questions specified in Question 1? CapabilitiesFrequency (of 19) Visualization and Map Operations15 Generic CyberInfrastructure Capabilities13 Spatial Middleware12 SpatialInterpolation11 Domain-Specific Modeling11 Online Problem-Solving10 Agent-Based Modeling10 Local Clustering Detection10 Spatial Econometrics9 Geostatistical Modeling9 Choice-Modeling9 Capability Statistics Mean: 6 Median: 4 Mode: 8 Min: 1 (3 x Generic CI) Max: 11 (7 x All) 7/19

Q3: What other application capabilities are needed for moving the science and policy of emergency management forward, perhaps incrementally or by a major leap? (Table portrays three separate lists. No cross-column reading intended.) Analysis/DataInteractionIntegration Socio-behavioral investigationMobile applications, technology for public Rapid synthesis of data, info and knowledge Improved understanding of coupled human/natural systems User and community-friendly collaborative tools Unified platform for short and long- term EM Geo-optimization coupled with decision-making Coordination and communication within the GISci Federal/State/Local communities High-performance computing (parallelization, partitioning, data mining, machine learning) Probabilistic & impact-sensitive decision-making Efficient information dissemination (content, context, user, time ) Ad hoc integration capabilities, adaptable and extensible Unstructured data utilizationNear-real time maps for web/mobileIntegration from different substantive problem domains Faster than real time simulationsInformation portals that bring together many different tools, info Ontology-based data access and integration Transdisciplinary & cross-domain, rapid, optimized, integrated, adaptable, highly-performant 8/19

Ontology/Concepts Coupled human/natural systems Vulnerabilities and impacts Resilience Uncertainty Computational Performance/Throughput Simulation Event prediction/forecast Impacts Response capacity Alternative futures Data/Information Scale/granularity Source (reliability, compatibility) Currency Integration Open Ad hoc Inclusive Selective 9/19 Communication Alerts VGI enablement Situation awareness Collaboration Operation Dynamic adjustment Methods/tech for first responders Decision Computational methods Geo-optimization Probability Cost/benefit analysis Collaboration

Q4: Based on your response in Question 3, what software tools / packages can address those other capabilities? SoftwareApplicationOpen Source: Considerations HAZUS-MH &MAEviz Impact Simulation Yes:Need redesign to be deployable to multi-processing environments OSSIMImpact Simulation Yes: Needsuitable extensions that address rapid damage assessment issues AnyLogicABM, event, system modeling No: Only of two who provide mixed- mode simulation WinBUGS& RIF (Rapid Inquiry Facility) Bayesian decision modeling ?:RIF is an extension of ArcGIS 5 Number of respondents who feel that the tools needed to innovate do not yet exist 10/19

Q4: Based on your response in Question 3, what software tools / packages can address those other capabilities? ToolsApplicationConsiderations Spatial videoData collectionGood for fine scale spatial data collection, allows commentary to be added Google Earth & Google Maps Information visualization & dissemination Easy to use and interpret findings PictometryInformation visualization Excellent data but very expensive IPhone apps, smartphones, Facebook Information visualization & dissemination, collaboration Good model for possibilities in EM 11/19

Q5: How would you like to see the application capabilities integrated into a CyberGIS platform? (Table portrays three separate lists. No cross-column reading intended.) Analysis/DataInteractionIntegration Need more research on linkages between systems to exploit them Linkage to social and other networks Gateway to high performance computing, many tools/data need to be re-designed Capture and use of data from a range of sources Rethink approach to geo-spatial portals and user interaction Needs to be useful to research and practice of EM, developer friendly Data driven simulation in distributed environment Visioning toolsSubscription and broadcast Spatial optimization and other multiple criteria decision support methodsintegrated as services Online mapping & image/video display editable by community groups - standards needed? Open standards, well-defined interfaces (web services), linkage without a priori knowledge Different views for different problems or audiences Data collection and aggregation through mobile apps into a common data platform Computational version of Google Earth 12/19

Q6: What are the main obstacles for answering the questions identified in Question 1 in light of CyberGIS, e.g. availability of software, data, software integration, etc.? “All of the above” “Most packages developed for different problem domains are largely silos with the ability to integrate with other systems either ignored or given only limited thought...this is a key constraint in a more holistic understanding of how these different frameworks may be brought together.” “The problem is very complex because of all the stakeholders, unique threats, socioeconomic and cultural variation in sub-populations, distributed resources and time critical nature of this application area.” 13/19

Q6: What are the main obstacles for answering the questions identified in Question 1 in light of CyberGIS, e.g. availability of software, data, software integration, etc.? Analysis/DataInteractionIntegration Verification of information e.g. source, data age, location relevance Effective dissemination of results to an impacted community/individuals EM requires standardized products (outputs), data/information sharing policies Real-time EM computation, eg. spatial analysis in 30 seconds Ability of web GIS interface to support interactions among users, applications, and data Parallelization of spatial computation and data partitioning Fine-scale data availability,especially in a dynamic form Cheap and user-friendly data collection system is needed Difficulties in implementation on various platforms Fine-grained data highly variable and non-existent at federal level Lack of knowledge of VGI’s fitness and applicability for disaster management Open platform for collaboration needed 14/19

Q6: What are the main obstacles for answering the questions identified in Question 1 in light of CyberGIS, e.g. availability of software, data, software integration, etc.? Analysis/DataInteractionIntegration Massive amount of data received immediately after an event Engagement of emergency services, overcoming institutional firewalls and inertia, good demonstrators Lack of understanding of the principles/concepts underlying the software Spatial confidentiality – for fine scale recovery process health information needs to be combined with built environment data Effective integration of community-contributed EM capabilities Lack of ontology of domain specific models and computational tools Availability of useful dataPolicies and funding to support readiness, not just response Specifying a model-driven architecture (SOA) at multiple levels needed 15/19

Applications Generic CyberInfrastructure Service Providers Service Consumers End Users CyberGIS EM Stack: Where is CyberGIS boundary? Where do we/you fit? Portals Model Standards Tech Standards Tech Standards Service Registry Devices Spatial Middleware 16/19

17/19 Wordle-based Tag Cloud: All Terms Note size of “SPATIAL” word at right

18/19 Tag cloud with top frequency terms removed

19/19 THANK YOU! CyberGIS Project is funded by National Science Foundation (NSF) grant number OCI as part of the NSF Software Infrastructure for Sustained Innovation (SI2) Program to develop a geospatial cyberinfrastructure environment for sustained geospatial innovation and discovery through the integration of cyberinfrastructure, GIS, and spatial analysis/modeling software. The researchers are responsible for all content.