NASA’s Earth Science Data System Working Groups

1. NASA’s Earth Science Data System Working Groups Science Data Systems in the Decadal Survey Era Workshop, June 25-26, 2009 Francis Lindsay WG Manager GSFC/ESDIS

2. Presentation Contents The origin and role of ESDSWGs The function and organizational structure of the ESDSWGs Overview of current WG activities and initiatives

3. Earth Science Data System Working Groups A recommendation was offered as an outcome of the NewDISS (1998) and SEEDS (2003) studies for the formation of active working groups that address key topics pertinent to NASA’s data systems. Four Working Groups were established by NASA HQ with a first joint meeting convening in 2004. The primary function of the ESDSWGs is to develop recommendations for improving the function and usefulness of NASA’s Earth science data systems. The ESDSWG is an essential forum for bringing in community insights and needs for evolving science data systems. Membership in ESDSWGs is open; NASA funded technology and data system-related projects are required to maintain representation in one or more of the WGs.

4. ESDS Working Groups • Standards Process – Review, recommend and catalyze adoption of proven community-based standards (e.g., land, oceans, atmosphere groups) • Technology Infusion – develop future data system capabilities vision and enable widespread adoption of key emerging information technologies • Software Reuse – develop approaches to increase reusability and recommendations to NASA HQ about enabling and encouraging reuse • Metrics Planning and Reporting - review, evolve and recommend metrics that measure progress of data systems in supporting ESD programs.

5. How the WGs Work Each WG is autonomous in establishing agendas, schedules and practices for performing its work. Recommendations, reports and other information products are developed by the WG and passed through the ESDSWG Manager before final vetting with NASA HQ DS Management. An annual joint meeting (all WGs) is held to develop needed synergies between WGs and address topics that will require active participation by all or some subset of the ESDSWGs. The ESDSWG has a budget to operate the WGs, provide needed support for its activities and host our annual meeting. There is a common web site to support and advertise ESDSWG activities while each WG has additional sites to conduct business specific to its group. http://esdswg.gsfc.nasa.gov

6. Prior Conditions Communication Channels Knowledge Persuasion Decision Confirmation Implementation Continued Adoption Adoption Characteristics of the 'Decision-Making Unit' Perceived Characteristics of the Innovation Later Adoption The Innovation Decision Process Discontinuance Continued Rejection Rejection Technology Infusion WG (TIWG)Chair: Karen Moe, Rob Raskin • Mission • Enable NASA’s Earth Science community to reach its research, application, and education goals more quickly and cost effectively through widespread adoption of key emerging information technologies • Approach • Improve community understanding of the technology infusion process • Identify barriers and solutions to technology adoption • Use case studies to evaluate effectiveness of infusion processes • Identify and evaluate new and emerging technologies • Develop roadmaps for adoption of key technologies • Capability Vision • Defines in detail ten capabilities comprising an Earth science information system capability vision • Identifies technologies critical to achieving the vision • Positions capabilities and technologies within a real-world scenario

7. Standards Process Group (SPG)Chair: Richard Ullman, Glenn Cunningham • Facilitate Data Systems Interoperability and Data Inter-use. • Benefit to NASA data systems of community endorsement: • NASA Earth science data management can rely on standards to achieve highest priority interoperability. • Science investigators assured that standards contribute to success in their discipline. • Benefit to community/project that proposes “RFC” • Encourage consensus within the community. • Grows use of common practices among related activities. • Wider discipline community learns from successful practice. • Lowers barriers to entry and use of NASA data by external discipline communities within NASA and outside NASA. • Accelerate adoption of practices through better communication. Escalation of capability … • successful practice in specific community • broader community adoption • community-recognized “standards” • Mission reliability • The Process • Modeled after example of Internet “IETF RFC”. • Tailored for responsiveness to NASA. • Proposed standards are documented as specifications according to SPG guidelines and submitted by practitioners within the NASA community. • The Standards Process Group forms a Technical Working Group (TWG) to coordinate evaluation. • What does “implementation” of this specification mean in the context of NASA Earth Science Data Systems? • What constitutes successful “operational” experience? • The community is invited by means of email announcement to comment on the specification and particularly to address questions formulated by the TWG. • The TWG also identifies key stakeholders that are likely to have particular experience with the technology and solicits their opinion. • The TWG reports to the SPG and the SPG makes recommendations for final status of the RFC. • SPG Recommendations to date: • Standards: • OPeNDAP, HDF5, HDF5-EOS, NetCDF Classic. GCMD DIF, OGC WMS • Technical Notes: • Aura Guidelines • Backtrack Orbit Spatial Search • SPG reviews now in process or anticipated: • Standards • ICARTT; [netCDF4, CF anticipated] • Technical Notes: • Interoperability with OGC CSW and WCS; Provenance within Data; WCS Server Design; Aura Guidelines Experience, DAP2 to HDF5 Mapping

8. Metrics Planning and Reporting WGChair: H. K. (Rama) Ramapriyan, Paul Davis • The MPAR-WG develops and recommends program-level performance metrics and tools for collecting them. • Programmatic Role Metrics: Characterize the role of the project within the NASA science, applications, and/or education programs. • Products and Services Metrics: Measure the number of types of products and/or services provided by a project, with data volumes as applicable. • Common Metrics: Overall measures reported by most if not all projects. • Project-Specific Metrics: Defined by each Project as best measures of its performance against its objectives. • Reporting: Products and Services metrics are reported monthly unless otherwise agreed. • Impact Metrics: Specific success stories that provide an example (s) of how the project’s products / services have directly benefited a user, organization, or activity it supports. • Metrics Collection Tools: Currently an on-line manual reporting tool and database, with a future transition of metrics reporting to a more automated system based on the ESDIS Metrics System (EMS) now used by the EOSDIS Data Centers (DAACs).

9. Software Reuse WGChair: Robert Wolfe (Acting), James Marshall Current Activities: • Awarding Peer-Recognition Software Reuse Award to selected recipients annually • Developing Reuse Readiness Levels to measure reusability • Prototyping a Reuse Enablement System (repository) for Earth science reusable software assets • Establishing a software reuse web site to promote and provide information about reuse • Publishing and presenting research on reuse issues Reuse Incentive Activities Awards and structural changes that directly or indirectly encourage reuse Support/Enablement Activities Efforts that provide tools and mechanisms to enable reuse Outreach and Education Activities Efforts that increase community awareness and understanding of benefits, best practices, etc. Policy Change Activities Efforts to reduce policy barriers to reuse Reuse Implementation Projects Efforts that result in the publication or use of a reusable component

10. BACKUP SLIDES

11. Peer-Recognition Award • The Peer-Recognition Software Reuse Award recognizes contributors to Earth science community software reuse practices. • Offers incentives and documents benefits of reuse. • Award categories: Contribution, Utilization, and Peer Education • Award program established by the Reuse WG in 2008. • Awarded efforts described on web portal • 5 award recipients selected in 2008 • Nominations requested by July 31. • For more information and a nomination form, please visit: http://www.esdswg.com/softwarereuse/Resources/awards/

12. Reuse Readiness Levels (RRLs) • Designed to measure the maturity of a technology in a reuse sense, and its readiness to be reused. • Initially, levels developed in nine topic areas the WG deemed important for measuring reuse maturity. • Levels and topic areas combined to create overall RRLs, with short labels and longer descriptions. • Iterative development process, using feedback from papers, presentations, and meetings to refine and improve topic area levels and RRLs. • Developed draft use cases for consumers and providers. • Future plans include using the RRLs to assess software and using the results to further refine the levels. • The RRLs could make it easier for consumers to select reusable software, and help providers improve software for reuse by others. • Potentially, RRLs could be used in contracts, much like TRLs are used.

13. Reuse Enablement System (RES) • Proposed catalog and repository of reusable Earth science software assets. • Completed requirements analysis, use cases definition, trade study and architecture study. • Developed prototype and WG is testing system for improvements. • Developing test plan and policies for system operation and maintenance. • Could reduce two major barriers to reuse found in a 2005 WG survey of the Earth science community: • Not knowing reusable assets exist • Not knowing where to find them Home page as viewed by an Anonymous User • Other highlights: • When logged in, a menu bar appears above the reuse banner. • Registered users can sign up for notifications. • Consumers see a note about registering for provider status if they want to submit assets to the RES.

14. Reuse Portal Web Site • A major education and public outreach activity for the WG. • Reused as template for other WG sites. • Resources section includes: • Awards • Books and articles • Events (with their submission deadlines) • Guidelines (e.g., on tech. transfer) • Library (including WG publications, presentations, case studies) • A popular community resource: • Over 24000 visitors and 96000 page views since Dec. 2005 (~3.5 years) • Averaging 790 visits and ~700 unique visitors per month • Has been in top 3 hits for “software reuse” on major search engines and still achieves high placement in search results • Good growth in visits and visitors: Visitors Views NewVisitors http://www.esdswg.com/softwarereuse/ Visits Repeat Visitors

15. How the MPAR-WG Operates • Metrics recommendations by the MPAR-WG address the metrics definitions, collection methods, policies, etc. • Recommendations are drafted, put through a review, comment, revision cycle, and voted on by the MPAR-WG, with a 2/3 majority required on the final vote, and sent to NASA HQ for approval. • The MPAR-WG then coordinates / supports implementation of approved recommendations. • The MPAR-WG provides on-going metrics support to projects (currently MEaSUREs, REASoN, and ACCESS). • The MPAR-WG holds annual meetings in conjunction with the ES-DSWG supplemented by telecons as needed. Accomplishments: • Consistent reporting of metrics, currently by 8 MEaSUREs, 9 ACCESS, and 8 REASoN projects, with 22 MEaSUREs to begin reporting. • Evolution of the metrics to meet community concerns as well as NASA management needs.

16. Capability Needs Identification • Workshops Tech Infusion • Tech Development ESTO Needs DB Capability Vision ES Research Funding Needs/ Investment Priority Weighting Matrix Technology Projections Tech Roadmap • Gap Analysis Summary of SEEDS Study Recommendations • Improve technology infusion • Deliver needed capabilities • Prevent orphaned technologies • Define a capability vision • Focus technology infusion efforts • Extend strategic technology planning processes • Incorporate systems vision into the process • Fund technology infusion projects

17. Process and Strategies Subgroup Identify technology infusion barriers and solutions Analyse infusion case studies Develop technology infusion readiness assessment guide Monitor emerging technology trends Technology Subgroups Semantic Web Services Interoperability and Orchestration Sensor Web Data Life Cycle / Data Stewardship Example Technolgy Subgroup Activities Conduct technology reviews and assessments. Explore technology capabilities using an Earth science use case. Develop technology-specific roadmaps and hype cycles. Prepare technology demonstrations. Identify best practices and barriers to technology adoption. Develop practical guides, technology primers, best practices guides. TIWG Subgroups

18. Metrics Planning and Reporting Working Group (MPAR-WG) • Mission Statement for the MPAR-WG: • Review and recommend program-level performance metrics and collection tools that measure how well each data activity supports the NASA Science Mission Directorate’s Earth science, applications, or education programs. • Community Membership in the MPAR-WG: • Membership is open to NASA data and service provider community (REASoN, ACCESS and MEaSUREs projects, DAACs, SIPSs, etc.). • The MPAR-WG currently includes 30 community members and 13 NASA civil servants (most affiliated with MEaSUREs, REASoN or ACCESS projects).

19. Selected Reuse WG Publications Marshall, J.J., Downs, R.R., Gilliam, L.J., Wolfe, R.E. (2008), Progress in the Development of a Prototype Reuse Enablement System. Eos Trans. AGU, 89(52), 2008 Fall Meet. Supplement, Paper Number: IN11A-1021. 2008 Fall AGU Meeting, San Francisco, CA, December 15–19, 2008 Marshall, J.J., Downs, R.R. (2008). Reuse Readiness Levels as a Measure of Software Reusability. Proceedings of the IEEE International 2008 Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, IGARSS 2008, Vol. 3. 7–11 July 2008, pp: III-1414 – III-1417. DOI: 10.1109/IGARSS.2008.4779626 Marshall, J.J., Downs, R.R., Samadi S., Gerard, N.S., Wolfe, R.E. (2008). Software Reuse to Support Earth Science. Journal of Frontiers of Computer Science and Technology, 2(3): 296–310. DOI: 10.3778/j.issn.1673-9418.2008.03.006 Gerard, R., Downs, R.R., Marshall, J.J., Wolfe, R.E. (2007). The Software Reuse Working Group: A Case Study in Fostering Reuse. Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Information Reuse and Integration. (IEEE IRI-07). Las Vegas, NV. August 2007, pp. 24–29, DOI: 10.1109/IRI.2007.4296592 Samadi, S., Gerard, R., Hunter, M., Marshall, J.J., Schweiss, R.J., Wolfe, R.E., Masuoka, E.J. (2007). Reusing Software to Build Data Processing Systems, Proceedings of 2007 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp. 1–12, ISBN 1-4244-0525-4, Big Sky, Montana, March 2007, IEEE Press, New York. DOI: 10.1109/AERO.2007.352814 Marshall, J.J, Olding, S.W., Wolfe, R.E., Delnore, V.E. (2006). Software Reuse Within the Earth Science Community, Proceedings of 2006 IEEE International Conference on Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium, pp. 2880–2883, ISBN 0-7803-9510-7, Denver, Colorado, July–August 2006, IEEE Press, New York. DOI: 10.1109/IGARSS.2006.740

20. ES-DSWG Standards Process Group (SPG) Pragmatic recommendations of “standards that work” from peer practice communities are a reliable guide to crossing the chasm between NASA’s technology innovation and mission reliability

21. Earth Science DSWG Standards Process • Facilitate Data Systems Interoperability and Data Interuse. • Benefit to NASA data systems of community endorsement: • NASA Earth science data management can rely on standards to achieve highest priority interoperability. • Science investigators assured that standards contribute to success in their discipline. • Benefit to community/project that proposes “RFC” • Encourage consensus within the community. • Grows use of common practices among related activities. • Wider discipline community learns from successful practice. • Lowers barriers to entry and use of NASA data by external discipline communities within NASA and outside NASA. • Accelerate adoption of practices through better communication. Escalation of capability … • successful practice in specific community • broader community adoption • community-recognized “standards” • Mission reliability

22. Earth Science DSWG Standards Process • The Process • Modeled after example of Internet “IETF RFC”. • Tailored for responsiveness to NASA. • Proposed standards are documented as specifications according to SPG guidelines and submitted by practitioners within the NASA community. • The Standards Process Group forms a Technical Working Group (TWG) to coordinate evaluation. • What does “implementation” of this specification mean in the context of NASA Earth Science Data Systems? • What constitutes successful “operational” experience? • The community is invited by means of email announcement to comment on the specification and particularly to address questions formulated by the TWG. • The TWG also identifies key stakeholders that are likely to have particular experience with the technology and solicits their opinion. • The TWG reports to the SPG and the SPG makes recommendations for final status of the RFC.

23. Earth Science DSWG Standards Process • SPG Recommendations to date: • Standards: • OPeNDAP, HDF5, HDF5-EOS, NetCDF Classic. GCMD DIF, OGC WMS • Technical Notes: • Aura Guidelines • Backtrack Orbit Spatial Search • SPG reviews now in process or anticipated: • Standards • ICARTT; [netCDF4, CF anticipated] • Technical Notes: • Interoperability with OGC CSW and WCS; Provenance within Data; WCS Server Design; Aura Guidelines Experience, DAP2 to HDF5 Mapping