The Multi-disciplinary Interoperability research challenges: EuroGEOSS and EGIDA projects

1. GEPW-5 – London, 8-9 Feb 2011 Sesion 3c Architecture and Data, Capacity Building, S&T, User Interface The Multi-disciplinary Interoperability research challenges: EuroGEOSS and EGIDA projects Stefano Nativi National Research Council of Italy (CNR)

2. Multi-disciplinary Interoperability • Different interoperability levels -at different Infrastructures level • Four main infrastructure types • Thematic/CommunityInfrastructures • SBA/CoP resources core functionalities • Digital Earth (Earth System Science) Infrastructure • Earth science resources core functionalities • Geospatial Information Infrastructure • Geospatial resources core functionalities • Distributed Computing Infrastructure • Distributed Capacity provision functionalities Earth System S&T Domain Semantics Digital Earth Infrastructure Decision & PolicyMakers Oceanographers Geologists Hydrologists Clinatologists Atmos. Science Oceanography Hydrology Information S&T Biodiversity Geology Geospatial Information Infrastructure Distributed Computing Infrastructure (s)

3. Challenges to fill the gap • Build on existing (autonomous) capacities • Implement a “system of systems” • Build on existing and futureinformation systems • Supplementing but not supplanting systems mandates and governance arrangements • Assure a Low Entry Barrier for Users and Resource Providers • Mediate (standard and non-standard capacities) • Interconnect (capacities) and Adapt existing capacities • ImplementSemanticInteroperability • Shift from technical interoperability towards conceptual composability • Avoid tight coupling or strong integrations

4. Low Entry Barrier Complexity to manage Users Complexity to manage Cyber-Infrastructure BrokeringFramework Complexity to manage Low Entry Barrier Providers

5. Publish Service Provider Service Consumer Server Client SOA approach • For complex (large and heterogeneous) infrastructures, SOA archetype does not scale and is not flexible Present GCI framewok Service Registry (tens of thousands) Find (Harvest) (hundreds) Bind Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider

6. Order Publish Service Provider Service Consumer Client Server The Brokering SOA (B-SOA) A more sustainable approach A Brokered-SOA proved to be more sustainable (i.e. flexible and scalable) Service Registry Find (tens of thousands) Service Consumer Harvest Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Bind (hundreds) (2-3) Service Provider Harvest Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Service Broker(s) Service Provider Service Provider Service Broker(s) Service Provider Service Provider Service Provider Mediator Service Provider

7. Combine Top-Down & Bottom-Up Approaches: harmonizing S&T and A&D GEO ADC, STC, CBC, UIC Tasks S&T S&T Promote GEO in S&T Communities Engage S&T Communities in Developing GEOSS AD Lower Entry Barrier AD SoSEngineeringProcess EU Programs National Initiatives

8. EuroGEOSS project

9. EGIDA project

10. GEO-EGIDA WorkshopConnecting GEOSS and its Stakeholders in Science and Technology Workshop Web Page www.geo-tasks.org/egida/meetings/snab_ws2011/introduction.php ( www.egida-project.eu ) Bonn, Germany, May 9-11, 2011

11. Conclusions • Multi-disciplinary interoperability is needed to develop the missing Earth System Science (Digital Earth) infrastructure • Main challenges to fill the gap include: • Build on existing (autonomous) capacities • Lower the present Entry Barrier for Users and resource Producers • Implement Semantic Interoperability • To advance the present SOA approach by developing the necessary Mediation and Brokering functionalities • Bottom-up and Top-down approaches must be considered to Harmonize the GEO S&T and A&D challenges • FP7 EuroGEOSS and EGIDA projects have been working for that

12. THANK YOU !

13. Low Entry Barrier for SBAs • SBAs (and CoPs) systems • Remain autonomous • Remain unchanged –no new standard must be implemented, no new component or service must be implemented or deployed • SBAs (and CoPs) mayuse their own standards to: • describe available spatial resources • publish accessible resources • The multi-disciplinary infrastructure must • implement all the necessary mediation and brokering functionalities to interoperate with SBA systems avoiding strong integrations • Implement necessary semantic services to facilitate multi-disciplinary interoperability at the conceptual level Providers & Users Providers & Users Brokering System