Tiziana Catarci SAPIENZA Università di Roma Dipartimento di Informatica e Sistemistica

1. Advanced User Interfaces + Data Integration + Mobile Process Management = Save Yourself !! The WORKPAD project for supporting emergency operatorsMobile Process Management, Integrated Dataand Geo-collaboration for Emergency Teams TizianaCatarci SAPIENZA Universitàdi Roma DipartimentodiInformatica e Sistemistica [Department of System & Computer Engineering] catarci@dis.uniroma1.it

2. Objective & Partners An Adaptive Peer-to-Peer Software Infrastructure for Supporting Collaborative Work of Human Operators in Emergency/Disaster Scenarios Università di Roma LA SAPIENZA Italy (COORDINATOR) Università di Roma TOR VERGATA Italy Salzburg Research Austria Technische Universitaet Wien Austria • IBM Italia – Center for Advanced Studies • Italy • APIF Moviquity S.A. • Spain • Software602 A.S. • Czech Republic • Calabria Region –Civil Protection Department • Italy

3. DealingwithEmergencies We address response and short-term recovery

6. Command SUOR = SalaOperativaUnificataRegionale CCS = Centro CoordinamentodeiSoccorsi COM = Centro OperativoMisto Coordination

8. Main Innovations • … on top of reliable communication networks, we build smart applications supporting teams • Process management and coordination • Provision of Integrated Data • Geo-collaboration

9. Outline • The Workpad “user-centered” methodology • Process Management and Coordination • P2P Data Integration • Geo-collaboration • UserValidation

10. The WORKPAD Methodology: UCD (1)

11. The WORKPAD Methodology: UCD (2)

12. RequirementEngineering • “Top down” • Regulations, laws, initiatives and projects on a European basis • “Bottom up” • Case study: EM of Civil Protection • Experience of users and system engineers

13. Deployed HCI Techniques • User groupcategorisation • Focus groups • Structured interviews • Scenario development • Storyboards • Hierarchicaltaskanalysis • Usabilitytests • Mock-upsand real prototypes

14. RequirementClassification • User requirements • What will theuserbeableto do withthe final system? • System requirements • Whichfunctionalities must beimplementedbytheengineers? (in order tosatisfytheuserrequirements)

15. Process Management and Coordination – ROME4EU

16. Motivations Currently most teams are intra-coordinated through transceivers and the operational knowledge “is tight” to the leader Formalize such knowledge, and enact it through software applications offered on mobile devices

17. WORKPAD at work… / 1 • A process designer defines a template for a certain event class capturing best practices and protocols at “peace” time. • The template leaves some configuration option open (e.g., a template for all earthquakes)

18. At run-time Alessandro instantiates the template “closing” the open options The abstract templates is made concrete by “closing” the open options The concrete process schema is loaded into the PMS WORKPAD at work… / 2 P2P Back-end 1. Back-end sends the template AN EMERGENCY FIRES!!! 2. Template instantiated to the specific emergency Alessandro (Team leader) Alessio (Generic member) Daniele (Generic member)

19. The process is enacted Now some tasks are ready to be assigned to team members. PMS assigns tasks whose conditions are all fulfilled to an actor qualified to execute them WORKPAD at work… / 3 P2P Back-end 3. The process is enacted inside ROME4EU Alessandro (Team Leader) Alessio (Generic member) Daniele (Generic member)

20. Members join the team specifying the capabilities they can provide Task assignment is done by considering the capabilities required and those provided by the members WORKPAD at work… / 4 P2P Back-end 4. Members join the team Alessandro (Team Leader) Alessio (Generic member) Daniele (Generic member)

21. The Work-list handlers of certain members receive the notification of the assigned tasks together with their inputs WORKPAD at work… / 5 P2P Back-end 5.Assignment of tasks to team members Alessandro (Team Leader) Alessio (Generic member) Daniele (Generic member)

22. WORKPAD at work… / 6 P2P Back-end • When a certain member completes a task execution, her WLH alerts the PMS. • This may cause other tasks to become enabled 6.Notification of task completion Alessandro (Team Leader) Alessio (Generic member) Daniele (Generic member)

23. PMS analyzes if new enabled tasks are assignable If any tasks, then assigns tasks to the best available peer (human and/or automatic service) that provides all required capabilities. WORKPAD at work… / 7 P2P Back-end 7. (Possible) Additional assignment of tasks to team members Alessandro (Team Leader) Alessio (Generic member) Daniele (Generic member)

24. ROME4EU: An adaptive PMS forsmartdevices / 1 • ROME4EU is an aPMS completely developed on Smart devices • PMS is in charge of carrying out processes by assigning tasks to appropriate humans and/or software resources. • It is adaptive, able to automatically adapt the process execution to deal with exogenous events breaking the initial assumptions.

25. ROME4EU: An aPMSforsmartdevices / 2 • ROME4EU is specifically targeted to highly dynamic and mobile environments • Dealing with unreliable and slow mobile networks • Limiting the battery consumption and the power usage. • Dealing with reduced PDAs’ screen size, which limit the amount of the information concurrently visualisable.

26. Architecture Team Leaders Team Members

27. Lessonslearned • Process Management Systems are worthy using in emergency management • Processes show the same complexity as business ones • Practically feasible (small memory and CPU requirements) • Well understood by end users • Automatic adaptation is necessary as a number of unexpected contingencies may occur • Manual adaptation would delay the operation execution

28. At a Glance

29. INTEGRATING DATA - ONDA

30. Motivations • Having data not only belonging to my organization but also coming from other sources … • Persons to save in a given building: 10 (with prob. 10% as this is the number of residents) – 14 (with prob. 90% as this is the number of different mobile phones registered in the area just 2 minutes before the emergency) • … without establishing a centralized system

31. What is P2P Semantic Integration? • Semantic data integration is about integrating data at the conceptual level • With centralized mediator-based systems, this is accomplished by a “global view” (ontology) which is mapped to source DB schemas (GAV, LAV, GLAV) • In decentralized environments, each system (peer) acts both as source and mediator

32. Command Coordination Aim of the component • Allow rapid integration of information flows of rescue organizations • Support organzations of every kind, even if they meet on the emergency for the first time • Support flexible design of command & coordination flows • Support Geo Data • Manage event notification

33. Front-End FE/BE Link Queries & Notifications Queries & Notifications KP KP P2P Mappings & Notifications Modeling & Configuration Modeling & Configuration Ontology Ontology Mappings withLocal Sources Mappings withLocal Sources Back-End Local Sources Local Sources

34. TechnicalOverview The WORKPAD’s Back-End network is a Peer-to-Peer Semantic Data Integration System (P2P-DIS) • Each Peer is a Semantic Data Integration System wich • Has an own ontology as global schema • Integrates heterogeneous sources through mapping with the local ontology • Integrates other peers through mappings between ontologies • A Client is able to • Perform semantic conjunctive queries • Receive notifications about relevant data changes (Add and Remove subscriptions)

35. Administrator Conceptual Modelling Dialogs Source Mappings Dialogs Peer-to-peer Mapping Dialogs Knowledge Base Management Modelling Layer Front-end Applications Query Processor Subscriptions & Notifications Reasoner Query & Reasoning Layer Active Subscr. External Applications Reasoner Wrapper Query Executor P2P Query Propagator Change Synch Peers Information Layer Peers Peers Interaction Layer Resources Ontologies, Mappings Local Data External Reasoner Architecture BE peers publish conceptual schemas (ontologies), then define mappings with local and remote systems The core element is a query processor that is able to evaluate \ propagate \ reconcile queries according with ontologies and mapping semantics

36. How WORKPAD’s SemanticIntegration Works \ 1 • Schemas are specified by rich logic languages (Description Logics) • City is_a Place(NAME) • Semantic mappings (GAV) with data sources are established • CAPITAL(ID)  City(f(ID)) • TOWN(NM)  City(f(NM)) • Queries are expressed in terms of ontology concepts • x,y | Place(x) AND NAME(x,y) • Queries get reformulated in terms of source schemas, based on mappings Query: get C1 instances C2 C1 Ontology C3 Mapping E1 E2 E3 Wrapping S1 S2 S3

37. How WORKPAD’s SemanticIntegration Works \ 2 • Suitable sub-queries are propagated to wrapped sources • Consistency of local data is up to local DBMS • Updates are propagated through a publish-subscribe mechanism • Peers subscribe updates on specific views (queries) • Notifications may be used to optimize data access or raise alerts

38. PeerConfiguration • OntologyProtégé • PeerConfigurationModelingEnvironment • PeerManifest • UniqueIdentifier • ServicesURLs • Ontology URL • Sources • SiblingPeers • Local and P2P Mappings The Ontologytranslated in DL-Lite (XML) • Translation Log (detailsabouttranslated, approximated and omittedontologyelements)

39. The user configures a peer by loading the system’s ontology and mapping it with local databases

40. Novelty • With state-of-the-art centralized systems, information integration is accomplished by a single schema (“global view”) which is statically mapped to information sources • However, this would require every organization to rely on a single integration system and rigidly adopt the very same conceptualization • In WORKPAD’s decentralized environment, on the contrary, each system (peer) acts both as source and mediator • This gives the possibility to every system (organization) to keep its legacy and provide contributions to global knowledge in a flexible and yet controlled way

41. Lessonslearned • In many cases, mapping legacy sources to ontologies may be not very easy • Development of rich conceptualizations, such as ontologies, cannot be entirely made at crisis time • P2P conceptual mapping could be facilitated if based on semantic standards • Information integration infrastructures for crisis management should be therefore prepared in advance for some extent

42. Geo-Collaboration

43. Motivations • To offer operators location-awareness … • … annotated with relevant information (coming from the integrated data) … • … and the possibility of annotating back and disseminating the new knowledge

44. Otherfeatures • Enrichment of aerial photos with geographic features • Real-time location indication of objects- and persons-of-interest • Real-time distribution of data input/modifications • Interaction with “layered” geo-information on handheld devices • Creating and annotating relevant points-of-interests • Dynamic updates of geo-information within WORKPAD front-end teams • Querying and persisting into back-end systems • No need of central server for operation • Decentral P2P-based information distribution • Possible BE interaction with semantically integrated information from various sources

45. GIS componentarchitecture J2ME based viewer/editor of SVG data Java EE based server + GeoServer Distributed tuple space-based information distribution Web Service stub to access BE

47. Lessonslearned • Presentation of geographic information is greatly appreciated • A great part of coordination is location-based • Currently mostly deployed on desktop machines • Much conceptual contributions could be achieved to Mobile GeoCollaboration • Long way from concept to implementation to product • Evaluation based on research prototype is difficult • Functionality is the first step, stability the second for acceptance • Tradeoff between platform independence and device coverage (=Java) vs. performance (=native, Windows Mobile) • Emulator – real device discrepancy • Pervasive computing: more (uncontrollable) variables (e.g. changing context factors, immaturity of technologies) •  Testing, testing, testing (“in the wild” in particular)

48. At a Glance

49. USER VALIDATION

50. Overview • User Test Methodology • Online Pre-Tests • Mock-upsandQuestionnaires • Controlled Experiments • Cooperative Evaluation • Test withExternal Users • The WORKPAD Showcases • Withoutandwith WORKPAD