The GEOSS Interoperability Process Pilot Project Status Report

1. The GEOSS Interoperability Process Pilot ProjectStatus Report Siri Jodha Singh Khalsa IEEE Committee on Earth Observations Standards Working Group

2. Contents • Scope and purpose of the IP3 • The GEOSS Interoperability Process and the Standards and Interoperability Forum • Description of use case scenarios • Progress Report • Schedule

3. Origins of the IP3 • The GEO ADC recognized the need to begin implementing the GEOSS infrastructure and testing the process for reaching interoperability. • The concept for an “Interoperability Process Pilot Project” was presented, reviewed and endorsed by the ADC co-Chairs in July 2006. • GEO Task AR-06-01 given task of developing a series of projects involving different SBA’s, leading up to a suite of demonstrations at the GEO Summit in November.

4. IP3 Development Phases • Phase 1 – Populating the Component, Services and Interoperability Registers • Phase 2 – Develop Cross-System Interoperability Scenarios, invoke SIF • Phase 3 – Create Demonstrations • Phase 4 – Work on Higher Levels of Interoperability • Repeat process with new components and scenarios to address other SBAs

5. Participating Systems and Principals • Biodiversity • Hannu Saarenmaa & Stefano Nativi • Seismology • Tim Ahern • CEOP • Ryosuke Shibasaki • WMO Information System - WIS • David Thomas

6. Phase 1 – Populating the Registers • Populate the GEOSS registers • Identify the standards, interface protocols and interoperability agreements in use • Provide information to the Clearinghouse as it is brought online • Analyze successful data integration projects, showing • why and how interoperability arrangements were made and maintained • how the interoperability arrangements worked under the computer and network environment of the time • what the impacts were of these arrangements

7. Component has interface? Component Contributor Register Component N Done Y Uses registered standard? Reference registered standard Begin Service Registration Y N Capture details of proposed GISA* Pass proposed GISA to SIF Done *GEOSS Interoperability Special Arrangement GEOSS Interoperability Process

8. The Standards and Interoperability Forum • A Standards and Interoperability Forum (SIF) is being formed to carry out impartial review of GEOSS interoperability issues and to recommend solutions. • Helping to establish the SIF and refining its protocols and procedures is one of the key objectives of the IP3.

9. SIF Role in Phase 1 of IP3 • During Service Registration, if the service does not use an existing “GEOSS Recognized Standard” (GRS) the contributor will enter details on proposed “GEOSS Interoperability Special Arrangements” (GISA). • This information will be passed to the SIF, which will manage entries into the “Special Arrangements” register hosted by the IEEE. • Interoperability Register = Standards Register + Special Arrangements Register • The SIF will also review and recommend promotion of GISAs to GRSs as appropriate.

10. Phase 2 – Cross-System Interoperability Scenarios • Develop scenarios that require the exchange of data and information between disparate systems which have not yet established a mechanism for such an exchange. • Address needs identified in one or more of the Societal Benefit Areas • Ensure relevancy and realism • Demonstrate how the GEOSS architecture, data, and services have made it possible to realize benefits that would not have been easily achieved otherwise

11. SIF Role in Phase 2 of IP3 • The SIF will assist in management or creation of interoperability arrangements between systems • Seek the input of technical and discipline experts • Evaluate Special Arrangements as submitted at service registration • Analyze existing entries in the Interoperability Register for applicability

12. Scenario Worksheet

13. Extended Scenario Template 1.Plain Language Description 1.1.Short Definition 1.2.Purpose 1.3.Describe a scenario of expected use 1.4.Definition of Success 2.Formal Use Case Description 2.1.Use Case Identification 2.2.Revision Information 2.3.Definition 2.4.Successful Outcomes 2.5.Failure Outcomes 3.Use Case Elaboration 3.1.Actors 3.2.Schematic of Use case 3.3.Preconditions 3.4.Postconditions 3.5.Normal Flow (Process Model) 3.6.Alternative Flows 3.7.Special Functional Requirements 4.Non-Functional Requirements 4.1.Performance 4.2.Reliability 4.3.Scalability 4.4.Usability 4.5.Security 4.6.Other Non-functional Requirements 5.Selected Technology 5.1.Overall Technical Approach 5.2.Architecture 5.3.Technology A 5.3.1. Description 5.3.2. Benefits 5.3.3. Limitations 5.4.Technology B 5.4.4. Description 5.4.5. Benefits 5.4.6. Limitations 6.References

14. IP3 Scenarios and Data Flows Ancillary GLIMS Terminus retreat Flood Risk Scenario Burford DEM (DEMIS) Seismic Events from Glacier/Ice Sheet Disintegration Scenario Ahern Soil moisture, stream gage, etc. GBIF CEOP Precip, soil moisture (TIGGE) Species data Precip (NCAR/TIGGE), stream gauge (CUAHSI /USGS) Climate data (NCAR) WIS Fault Lubrication Scenario Ahern Species Response to Climate Change Scenario Nativi Precip, soil moisture (TIGGE) Exotic event catalog Event catalog Landslide Risk Scenario Thomas FDSN Meningitis Early Warning System Kelly Seismic Trigger

15. Species Response to Climate Change • Ecological Niche Modeling is applied to study the adaptation of butterflies in Canada and Alaska to various climate change scenarios. Requires interoperability between the GBIF (Global Biodiversity Information Facility) and components of the WIS (World Meteorological Organization Information System).

16. Flood Risk Scenario • A distributed surface run-off model provides data for flood warning and dam operation systems. Requires interoperability between CEOP (Coordinated Enhanced Observation Period) systems and components of the WIS.

17. Landslide Risk • Analysis to determine whether rainfall and seismic data be used to predict locations where hillsides are susceptible to collapse. Requires interoperability between the FDSN (International Federation of Digital Seismographic Networks), the WIS, and an interoperable landslide database network in Australia.

18. Fault Lubrication • Analysis to determine whether high rainfall rates or excess groundwater produce increased earthquake activity in areas of known faults. Requires interoperability between FDSN and WIS components.

19. Seismic Events from Glacier/Ice Sheet Disintegration • Analysis of seismic signals and a combination of remote sensing and in situ data for selected glaciers to determine whether global seismic networks can be used to monitor ice sheets and glacial activity and thus remotely sense effects of warming on a global scale. Requires interoperability between FDSN and databases at the National Snow and Ice Data Center.

20. Scenario End Points • Two of the scenarios (GBIF and Flood Risk) have substantial resources backing them • Schedule/critical path for these being worked • End point is live demo plus video or narrated slide show • The scenarios involving FDSN may not evolve past conceptual stage due to lack of resources • End point is 2-page write up • At least 2 of the scenarios will require “special arrangements” to be registered, thus ensuring involvement of the SIF.

21. Phase 3 – Demonstrations • Present results of Phase 2 to the Architecture and Data Committee and then with all GEO Members and Contributing Organizations • Prepare a briefing on the process • Include live demonstration of those infrastructure components that have been implemented • The Interoperability Register and Registry • Data and information exchange via the defined arrangements • Two kinds of demonstrations • technical • social benefit demo for policy makers and senior managers • to illustrate interoperability process and its benefits

22. Phase 4 – Higher Levels of Interoperability • Develop higher levels of interoperability • Exercise more completely the capabilities of the protocols and interfaces identified • Address semantic interoperability • Ensure the meaning of the data and information exchanged through the interfaces are intelligible to the recipient systems

23. IP3 Status • Component registration forms filled out for all components • Awaiting component registry to become operational • Scenario sheets written, including service interface descriptions • Specifics being captured as service registry is used • Standards registry is operational • Common international standards as initial content

24. Outstanding Issues • Initial list of GEOSS-Recognized Standards • SIF composition and tasking (next talk) • "All interface implementations should be ... verified through interoperability testing and public demonstrations." [GEOSS 10-year Implementation Plan Reference Document] • Does this apply to all interoperability arrangements? • If self-certified, who witnesses the “public demonstrations”? • IP3 as ongoing support for new participants?

25. Schedule

26. Summary • The Interoperability Process Pilot Projects are contributing to the development of the GEOSS architecture by exercising core GEOSS components and processes. • The scenarios under development are fully compliant with, and representative of, the GEOSS process for reaching interoperability.