1 / 35

Situational Awareness in Emergency Response

Situational Awareness in Emergency Response. Dr. Sharad Mehrotra Professor of Computer Science Director, RESCUE Project http://www.itr-rescue.org. Crisis Response. A massive, multi-organization operation Many layers of government Federal : FEMA, FBI, CDC, national guard, . .

jamil
Télécharger la présentation

Situational Awareness in Emergency Response

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Situational Awareness in Emergency Response Dr. SharadMehrotraProfessor of Computer ScienceDirector, RESCUE Project http://www.itr-rescue.org

  2. Crisis Response • A massive, multi-organization operation • Many layers of government • Federal: FEMA, FBI, CDC, national guard, .. • State: Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (OES), highway patrol, … • County: county EOC, police, fire personnel, … • City: city emergency offices, police, firefighters, … • Volunteer Organizations • Red cross, organized citizen teams • Industry • Gas, electric utilities, telecommunication companies, hospitals, transportation companies, media companies …. SYSTEM LEVELS LAW POLICY FEDERAL AUTHORITY STATE RESOURCE COORD LOCAL OPERATIONS EMC C2 Incident command C2 FIRST RESPONDERS VICTIMS

  3. Los Angeles County Emergency Management Organization Operational Area Emergency Operations Center LA County Emergency Management Council Board of Supervisors Chair of the Board Operational Area Coordinator Director of Emergency Operations Sheriff Other Entities Disaster Management Area Coordinators Sheriff Contact Stations Emergency Mgmt Information System Cities of Los Angeles County (87) 3

  4. Operational View of Response • Crisis Management • Field level operation • Command and control • Usually local government in-charge • Consequence Management • Gather information • Field, Cities, Special districts, County departments, Other EOC sections/branches • Analyze consequences with focus on the future • Develop plan of action • Life safety, Property loss, Environment, Reconstruction • Establish who is responsible

  5. Operations- Consequence Analysis Public Safety Potential need for: • Security for damaged/evacuated structures • Route management • Civil disturbance control • Casualty/Fatality collection points • Fire fighting/HAZMAT support . • Shelter requirements • Impact on poor • Language, other cultural needs • Food/water distribution • Impact on schools • Impact on non-profit agencies Care/Shelter

  6. Operations – Consequence Analysis Construction • Need for building inspections • Removal of hazardous materials • Demolition/debris removal • Transportation network – impact and restoration • Water/sewage/flood control system impacts CONSTRUCTION & ENGINEERING • Impact of utility outages • Priorities for restoration • Impact on purchasing system • Impact on transportation • Priorities for transportation restoration • Other support Logistics

  7. Role of Information in Response Hypothesis:Right Information to the Right Person at the Right Time can result in dramatically better response • Response • Effectiveness • lives & property saved • damage prevented • cascades avoided • Quality of • Decisions • first responders • consequence planners • public Quality & Timeliness of Information • Situational • Awareness • incidences • resources • victims • needs

  8. Challenges in Situational Awareness Diversity of delivery mechanisms Variability in warning times &urgency Scale – size of impacted population Recipient state & characteristics Inter-organizational relationships Lack of incentives Privacy & confidentiality concerns, fear of misuse Dynamically evolving needs Incompleteness & uncertainty in Data Multimodality and Diversity of Data Real time requirements State of infrastructure Surge demands Diversity of data sources Concerns of privacy & confidentiality

  9. RESCUE Project The mission of RESCUE is to enhance the ability of emergency response organizations to rapidly adapt and reconfigure crisis response by empowering first responders with access to accurate & actionable evolving situational awareness Funded by NSF through its large ITR program

  10. RESCUE Partners

  11. Social & Disaster Science context, model & understanding of process, organizational structure, needs Engineering & Transportation validation platform for role of IT research Security, Privacy& Trust Cross cutting issue at every level Information Centric Computing enhanced situational awareness from multimodal data Networking & Computing systems Computing, communication, & storage systems under extreme situations RESCUE Research

  12. Situational Awareness Research in RESCUE Decn. Support Tools Situational Data Management Extraction, synthesis, Interpretation

  13. Approach • Multimodal multi-sensor signal processing • Robustness to noise – noise affecting one modality may be independent of the others. • E.g., multimicrophe speech recognition with background noise • Complementary information in different modalities – certain events easier to detect in some modalities than others. By combining modalities we can build systems that detect complex events • E.g., Tracking people is easier in video whereas speaker identification is easier in audio. • Exploit semantics & context for signal interpretation • Knowledge of domain can help interpret data, fill missing values, disambiguate.

  14. Exploiting Semantics for Situational Awareness • How does the system obtain & represent semantics? • User specified • Language for specification of semantics, expressibility, completeness • learnt from data • expressibility, training set might not be available for supervised learning, noise in data may skew unsupervised learning • Principled approach to exploiting semantics to interpret data • Probabilistic models? • Efficiency • Most such problems are NP-hard • Generalizability of the approach • Can we design a generalized approach that can be used to work across diverse types of data and for diverse situational awareness tasks.

  15. Event Detection from sensors • 2300 Loop sensors in LA and OC • Goal: Detect events such as “baseball game” from loop sensor count data. • Semantics: • Historical traffic data both during game night and non-game night • Data is, however, unlabelled. • Smyth et. al. -- TRBC 06, SIGKDD 06, ACM TKDD, AAAI 07, UAI 07

  16. Ideal model car count Baseline model car count Detecting Unusual Events Unsupervised learning faces a “chicken and egg” dilemma (and others)

  17. p p Time, Day Time, Day Event Event l l a a True Count True Count Sensor State Sensor State q q Observed Count Observed Count Inference over Time Time t Time t+1 Note how many hidden variables are in this model

  18. Detecting Real Events: Baseball Games Remember: the model training is completely unsupervised, no ground truth is given to the model

  19. Entity Resolution Problem TODS 2005, IQIS 05, SDM 05, JCDL 07, ICDE 07, DASFAA 07, TKDE 07

  20. Two Most Common Entity-Resolution Challenges Fuzzy lookup • reference disambiguation • match references to objects • list of all objects is given Fuzzy grouping • group together object repre-sentations, that correspond to the same object DASFAA 2007, Bangkok, Thailand

  21. DASFAA 2007, Bangkok, Thailand Example of the problem: Disambiguating locations

  22. Web Disambiguation Music Composer Football Player UCSD Professor Comedian Botany Professor @ Idaho

  23. Context Attraction Principle (CAP) if • reference r, made in the context of entity x, refers to an entity yj • but, the description, provided by r, matches multiple entities: y1,…,yj,…,yN, then • x and yj are likely to be more strongly connected to each other via chains of relationships • than x and yk (k = 1, 2, … , N; k j). publication P1 “J. Smith” John E. Smith SSN = 123 P1 John E. Smith Jane Smith Joe A. Smith Can be translated into a graph connectivity analysis which can be interpreted using a probabilisitic interpretation.

  24. Experiments: Quality (web disambiguation) By Artiles, et al. in SIGIR’05 By Bekkerman & McCallum in WWW’05

  25. GDF vs. Traditional (Robustness)

  26. GDF vs. Context (Bhattarya & Getoor)

  27. Semantics in IE • Extracting relations from free / semi-structured text (slot-filling) • Exploiting semantics in IE • declaratively specified • Specified as (SQL) integrity constraints • On the relation (s) to be extracted • Learnt from data • Mine patterns and associations from the data

  28. Declarative Constraints create table researcher-bios ( name: person title: thing employer: organization employer-joined: date doctoral-degree: degree doctoral-degree-alma: organization doctoral-degree-date: date masters-degree: degree masters-degree-alma: organization masters-degree-date: date bachelors-degree: degree bachelors-degree-alma: organization bachelors-degree-date: date previous-employers: organization awards: thing CHECK employer != doctoral-degree-alma CHECK doctoral-degree-date > masters-degree-date )

  29. Top10 med unranked in US OUT T1 Stanford CSU Tsinghua T2 PI PD MI MD BI 1989 2002 PI PD MI MD BI T3 PI PD MI MD BI Pattern mining over data • Represent data as graph (RDF) • Mine interesting patterns • Including “graph associations” • Example above • Mostly people who have a PhD degree from a school outside the US also have their bachelors degree from a school out side the US.

  30. Constraints in Action TUPLE (POSSIBLE) INSTANCES John Smith, PhD, UCI, 2000, MS, MIT, 1997, BS, UCI, 1995 John Smith, PhD, MIT, 1997, MS, MIT, 2000, BS, UCI, 1995 John Smith, PhD, MIT, 2000, MS, MIT, 1997, BS, UCI, 1995 • CONSTRAINTS • Order of degree dates • No “toggling” of schools John Smith, PhD, UCI, 2000, MS, MIT, 1997, BS, UCI, 1995 John Smith, PhD, MIT, 1997, MS, MIT, 2000, BS, UCI, 1995 John Smith, PhD, MIT, 2000, MS, MIT, 1997, BS, UCI, 1995

  31. Experimental Results: Improvement CONSTRAINTS ATTRIBUTE LEVEL CD1. All (CS) PhDs awarded after 1950 CD2. Current position is from among a fixed list CD3. PhD awarded only by a PhD awarding school TUPLE: CT1. People do not “toggle” between schools CT2. Dates of doctoral, masters, and bachelors degrees are in orderCT3. People do not work at the same place they graduate from CT4. More likely that the grad school is US and the undergrad school is outside US (vs other way around)CT5. The grad school rank is at least as good (or better) than the undergrad school rank • researcher-bios domain • (upto) 300 training documents (Web bios) • Test set > 2000 documents • Use RAPIER + Schema (type) information as baseline • Add several constraints • Improvement in both precision and recall

  32. Challenges • Language for specifying constraints. • Principled approach to exploiting constraints/ patterns for extraction. • Scalability/efficiency • Naïve approach of enumerating all possible worlds leads to exponential complexity. • Problem NP hard even with a single FD (e.g., Year  BestMovie) Possible “worlds” (exponential !!) Crash, 2005 Crash, 2006 Crash, 2005 Million Dollar Baby, 2005 The Lord of the Rings, 2004 X Million Dollar Baby, 2005 X Crash, 2006 Million Dollar Baby, 2005 The Lord of the Rings, 2005 The Lord of the Rings, 2004 The Lord of the Rings, 2005 Crash, 2006 Million Dollar Baby, 2005 The Lord of the Rings, 2004

  33. Summary • Situational Awareness research in RESCUE • Event detection, extraction, and interpretation from multimodal sensor data • Situational data management (R. Jain, S. Mehrotra) • Tools for decision support (S. Mehrotra) • Two approaches: • Exploiting multimodal and multisensor input • Multimodal speech, multi-microphone recog.  B. Rao, • Speech enhanced video  M Trivedi • Bayesian framework for Multi-sensor event detection  P Smyth, • Exploiting semantics for interpretation • Text, entity disambiguation  S Mehrotra • Sensor data  P Smyth • Dynamic recalibration of video based event detection system exploiting semantics [MMCN 08]  S. Mehrotra, N. Venkatasubramanian • Automated tagging of images using speech input exploiting context and semantics [Tech. Report 08]  S, Mehrotra

  34. Summary • Situational awareness applications requires techniques to translate raw multimodal signals into higher level events. • Extensive research on signal processing but much of it studies different modalities in isolation • Multimodal event detection and exploiting semantics to interpret data is a promising direction. • A principled, generalizable, and a comprehensive approach represents a major challenge and an opportunity. • Situational awareness tools built on such tools could bring transformative changes to the ability of first responders and response organizations to respond to crisis.

  35. Connection to Cyber SA Most of this talk focussed on here. Techniques could translate for cyber awareness. Also, through monitoring physical systems they directly could impact cyber SA. interdependencies Physical systems Cyber Systems Adaptation, Security intercepts Adaptation, refinement Situational Awareness Of physical Systems Situational Awareness Of underlying cyber systems Awareness of state of physical system helps gain cyber situational awareness and vice versa. I.e., State of physical systems can serve as sensors for cyber systems and vice versa

More Related