Transcript Formerly known as the ESIP AQ Cluster

The ESIP Air Quality Workgroup
and its role in a
Community Information Infrastructure
Earth Science Information Partners
Air Quality Workgroup
http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/Air_Quality_Work_Group
ESIP Air Quality Workgroup
Formerly known as the ESIP AQ Cluster
The objective of the ESIP Air Quality Workgroup is to connect air
quality data consumers with the providers of those data by:
Communities
“Conversation
of Practice
is king.
are Content
groups of
is people
just
who
 bringing
people
and
ideas
how to with
deliver
interact
something
about
a common
to
talk together
about.”
activity on
of interest
the ES data to AQ
researchers,
managers
and other
users
objective
of exchanging
information,
-Corycollaborating
Doctorow and
learning how to improve that activity
Based
on definition by
Etienne
Wenger
 facilitate and demonstrate
the information
flow
among
data
providers to air quality consumers
The Air Quality Web Landscape (not comprehensive)
NASA Programs/Projects
• REASoN (Friedl, Moe)
• WRAP (Ambrosia, Sullivan)
• EDAC (Morain, Benedict, Hudspeth)
• LAITS (Di, Yang)
• AQ Web Infrastructure (Husar, Falke)
• ACCESS (Lindsay, Maiden)
• Giovanni (GSFC – Kempler)
• DECISIONS (Friedl)
• 3D-AQS (Hoffman, Engel-Cox, Prados)
• RS for BlueskyRAINS (Sullivan, Raffuse)
• Aura in AQ Forecasting (McHenry)
• VIEWS/TSS (Shankar, McClure)
• AIST (Moe)
• SAMITS (Falke)
• Sensor Web Architecture & Demo (Mandl)
• DAACS
EPA Programs/Projects
• AMI (Young, Keating)
• GEO (Young, Washburn, Lyon, Foley)
• AirNOW (Wayland, Dickerson)
• AQS
• OAQPS (Scheffe, Frank, Dimmick, Solomon)
• IDEA (Szykman)
• HTAP (Keating)
• Remote Sensing Gateway (Paulson, Walter)
• Environmental Science Connector (Kapuscinski)
NOAA Programs/Projects
• Air Quality Forecasting (Fine, NESDIS)
• NGDC (Haberman, Kozimor)
• Hazard Mapping System (Ruminski)
Forest Service Programs/Projects
• Bluesky (Larkin, Goodrick)
•
Mediators
• DataFed (Husar)
• Unidata (Domenico, Ramamurthy)
• CDE (Ambrosia, Sullivan)
• Giovanni (Leptoukh, Prados)
• LAITS (Di)
• RSG (Paulson)
• NEISGEI (Falke)
• VIEWS (McClure)
Portals / Catalogs
• GEO Portals
• Earth Information Exchange (ESIP)
• Earth Observation Portal (GEO)
• Geospatial One Stop
• Environmental Science Connector (EPA)
• Global Change Master Directory (GCMD)
• ECHO (NASA)
• LEAD (NSF)
Interoperability Efforts
• GALEON
• ESIP
• OGC OWS testbeds
• GEOSS pilots
• EPA Data Summit
State
• Aura in AQ Forecasting (Lamb, Vaughan)
• RPOs
• Vermont (Poirot)
International
• ESA/KMNI
• CEOS ACC
ESIP Air Quality Workgroup
data
tools,methods,services
users
AQ Workgroup aids
AQ Workgroup
in reuse of data,
brings together
processing tools and
groups and
helps
“There
is no one specific Internet or multiple Internets;
other services so
build links among
it is a vast, shifting network connecting devices that projects,
them in order to
data
tools,methods,services users
dynamically….No
one
entity
owns it or controls it”programs and
achieve an effective
agencies avoid the
-Governer et al., “Web 2.0 Architectures”
use of data in
end-to-end burden
decision-making that
of developing those
could not be
capabilities or having
achieved by any
to create the
organization acting
connections
on its own.
themselves.
a)
b)
c)
.
.
.
Recent Examples related to Proposal Responses
• ESIP AQ Workgroup should not serve as PI or co-PI
– rather provide the framework or environment in which the PI, co-PIs and
collaborators work among themselves and with others
• Collaboration Process Example: Response to recent GEO CFP
– Because of regular interaction in the AQ Workgroup, two groups
preparing an AQ application proposal for India became aware of their
respective efforts
– Identified ways to combine efforts into single proposal that was more
responsive to the CFP and that enhanced each groups
– The collaboration in the US also led to discovery of collaborations in India
• How do we do that kind of discovery, identification,
acknowledgement and collaboration with data and
other services within an information infrastructure?
Architecture Implementation Pilot
Augmenting GCI
GEOSS Common
Infrastructure
Main GEO
Web Site
Registered Community
Resources
Client Tier
Registries
GEO
Web Portals
Community
Portals
Client
Applications
Components
& Services
Standards and
Interoperability
Best Practices
Wiki
Business Process Tier
GEOSS
Clearinghouse
User
Requirements
Community
Catalogues
Workflow
Management
Alert
Servers
Processing
Servers
Access Tier
GEONETCast
Product Access
Servers
Sensor Web
Servers
Model Access
Servers
GEOSS Architecture Implementation Pilot
Find
Smoke
data
GetCap
To
ISO
Get
CALPUFF
Capabilities
WCS
Web
Apps
Evolving AQ
Architecture
ISO
GEOSS AIP – AQ Upfront Expectations
•
Better awareness across community
– Existing interoperability efforts
– Complementary projects and programs
– Develop collaborations
•
Better understanding and use of proposed standards and gaps
– Standardization of intra- and inter-system data exchange
– Community-level Standardization (e.g., of parameter codes, etc.)
•
Better use of existing data and services
–
–
–
–
–
–
•
Make data services available to more users within the air quality community
Acquire additional data sets from other servers
Connect across data services (capture data lineages)
Leveraging and reuse of existing resources through service-chaining
Increased value of existing development investments
Identification of complementary data sources and components for integrated analyses
Better understanding of GEOSS and how to contribute and use it
– Clarity and agreement on best practices, and approaches
– “Killer” scenarios
Where do we go next?
• Engage participation – we don’t have critical mass yet
• Community-based conventions/best practices
– Standards Implementation (defining standards is just part of the
process. Implementing them hasn’t received the same attention)
– Compliance/conformance engines can help
• More implementation (keep building on previous efforts)
– Get past data registration and search and into use
• Convey concepts so that everyone sees where they fit in
and what’s in it for them
– Need to move from abstract to tangible, get past architecture
diagrams
– Needs to be something others can build on