Technology Infusion Working Group

1
Technology Infusion Working Group

• Co-Chairs
• Karen Moe, NASA/ESTO
• Rob Raskin, NASA/JPL
• Earth Science Data Systems Working Group Meeting
• Philadelphia, PA
• October 23-25, 2007

2
Agenda

• Mission Scope
• Activities Accomplishments
• Process Strategies
• Web Services
• Semantic Web
• Sensor Web
• Breakout Session Agenda
• Technology Showcase
• Web Services and Semantic Web Demonstrations

3
Tech Infusion Working Group

• Mission
• Enable NASAs Earth Science community to reach
  its research, application, and education goals
  more quickly and cost effectively through
  widespread adoption of key emerging information
  technologies
• Scope
• Information technologies that...
• Provide capabilities critical to the ESD mission
  vision
• Have been substantially developed (TRL6-9) but
  have not been widely deployed
• Cannot be obtained simply through reuse of mature
  subsystems or software
• May be slow to adopt because of the unique
  characteristics of Earth science (e.g., high data
  volumes)?
• 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

4
TIWG 2007 Activities

• Maintained 4 active subgroups
• Infusion Process and Strategies
• Subgroup lead Steve Olding
• Web Services
• Subgroup lead Ken Keiser (UAH)?
• Semantic Web
• Subgroup lead Peter Fox (NCAR)?
• Sensor Web
• Subgroup lead Karen Moe (ESTO)?
• Conducted weekly telecons
• 1st Thursday Full working group
• 2nd Thursday Process and Strategies
• 3rd Thursday Web Services
• 4th Tuesday Sensor Web
• 4th Thursday Semantic Web
• Presented poster and held TIWG breakout session
  at summer ESIP Federation meeting

5
Capability Vision

• Continue to review and maintain the Capability
  Vision
• Use the Capability Vision to identify
  technologies to study
• Align technology roadmaps to the Vision

6
Technology InfusionProcess and Strategies
Sub-Group

• Subgroup Lead
• Steve Olding, GSFC

7
Process and Strategies Subgroup

• Reviewed techniques for tracking new and emerging
  technologies
• Prediction markets
• Hype cycles
• Social tagging
• Created hype cycle for Google Earth
• Created hype cycle for Earth science technologies
• Social tagging with del.icio.us

8
Gartner Technology Hype Cycle

• Phases in the adoption of a new technology
• "Technology Trigger"
• The first phase of a Hype Cycle is the
  "technology trigger" or breakthrough, product
  launch or other event that generates significant
  press and interest.
• "Peak of Inflated Expectations"
• In the next phase, a frenzy of publicity
  typically generates over-enthusiasm and
  unrealistic expectations. There may be some
  successful applications of a technology, but
  there are typically more failures.
• "Trough of Disillusionment"
• Technologies enter the "trough of
  disillusionment" because they fail to meet
  expectations and quickly become unfashionable.
  Consequently, the press usually abandons the
  topic and the technology.
• Less visibility. More users.
• "Slope of Enlightenment"
• Although the press may have stopped covering the
  technology, some businesses continue through the
  "slope of enlightenment" and experiment to
  understand the benefits and practical application
  of the technology.
• "Plateau of Productivity"
• A technology reaches the "plateau of
  productivity" as the benefits of it become widely
  demonstrated and accepted. The technology becomes
  increasingly stable and evolves in second and
  third generations. The final height of the
  plateau varies according to whether the
  technology is broadly applicable or benefits only
  a niche market

9
2007 Hype Cycle for Emerging Earth Science
Technologies v0.3
Visibility
Advanced Web Services (SOAP)?
OpenGIS WCS
Digital Earth
Estimate years to mainstream adoption in Earth
science
Sensor Web
Simple Web Services (REST)?
ECHO service catalog
SWEET
2-5 years
Google Earth
OpenGIS WMS
Semantic Web
5-10 years
10 years
Obsolete before plateau
GeoSciML
Time
Slope of Enlightenment
Plateau of Productivity
Technology trigger
Peak of Inflated Expectations
Trough of Disillusionment
10
Social Bookmarking with del.icio.us
11
Users can create their own tags
12
Search using TIWG tags
Use the tiwg AND radar tags for new and
emerging Earth science technologies
13
Total number of times that this link has been
tagged (all users, not just tiwg)
Use the search to see what others have been
tagging
14
Start Tagging

• Go to http//del.icio.us/
• Register a new account
• Install the browser buttons
• Use the tiwg AND radar tags to identify new
  and emerging technologies of interest to the
  Earth science community

15
Technology InfusionWeb Services Sub-Group

• Subgroup Lead
• Ken Keiser
• Information Technology and Systems Center
• University of Alabama in Huntsville

16
Web Services Subgroup

• Developed white paper on SOA security
• Reviewed the ECHO services registration process
  from an end user perspective
• Updated the Web Services Roadmap

17
Service Oriented Architecture Security

• Security White Paper
• I. Introduction
• II. General Application Security Issues
• Authentication
• Authorization
• Data Integrity
• Non-repudiation and Auditing
• Data Confidentiality and Privacy
• III. SOA Application Security
• IV. Network Security And SOA
• General Network Security Concerns
• Security Attacks around SOA
• Security Defense
• V. Security Compliance

Source http//enterprisearchitecture.nih.gov/
Principal authors Steve Olding, GSFC Jerry Pan,
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
18
Evaluate Service Registry Approaches

• Presentations from
• ECHO (Andy Mitchell and Michael Burnett)?
• GCMD (Lola Olsen)?
• Earth Science Gateway (Nadine Alameh)?

19
Review of NASA ECHO Web Service Registration
Process White Paper

• Pragmatic review of the web services registration
  process from the end user perspective
• Document the registration process
• Provide guidance to prospective users of ECHO
• Provide feedback to ECHO operations

Principal authors Yuqi Bai and Liping Di, George
Mason University Ken Keiser, University of
Alabama in Huntsville
20
ECHO Web Service Registration Lessons Learned
Recommendations

• Based on this exercise, our understanding is
• ECHO 8 supports Web Service Providers to register
  the Web Service Interface and the Web Service
  Implementation objects.
• Web Service Providers need to have two types of
  accounts in ECHO one Service Provider account
  and at least one user account. The user
  account(s) must be associated with the Service
  Provider account.
• Two distinct WSDL files are needed the Web
  Service Interface WSDL and the Web Service
  Implementation WSDL. They should be accessible on
  the web.
• Web Service Interfaces will be activated by ECHO
  Ops. A new hosting URL will be provided by the
  ECHO system. We need then to update Web Service
  Implementation WSDL file accordingly to reference
  this new Web Service Interface URL.
• The Web Service Interfaces and the Web Service
  Implementations will not be publicly discoverable
  and accessible until they are activated by ECHO
  Ops.
• Suggestions for Web Service Providers
• First register the Web Service Interface then the
  Web Service Implementation.
• Run discovery function to guarantee that the
  registered Web Service Object is available before
  taking the next step.
• Use ECHO Extended Services Tool to fulfill Web
  Service Object registration.
• Send emails directly to ECHO Ops at
  echo_at_killians.gsfc.nasa.gov for any problems you
  may encounter when registering Web Service
  Objects.

• Suggestions for ECHO Operations Group
• The ECHO Extended Services Tool only provides
  Register/update/delete functionalities for Web
  Service Providers. It would be better to support
  discovery functions.
• Remove unnecessary functions from the ECHO
  Extended Services tool, or make them invisible to
  Web Service Providers.
• Our experiment is time-consuming. We encountered
  some exceptions or problems in almost every step.
  A user guide for Web Service Providers is highly
  needed. It not only shows one step after another
  how they can fulfill all the tasks, but includes
  some QoA sections for quick problem resolving.
• A guide for Web Service Users is also needed.
• ECHO Ops personnel are very helpful. It would be
  better if they could be more responsive.
  Currently, users are supposed to report any issue
  to an open email list. But some times, "everybody
  is responsible" can come to mean "nobody is
  responsible".
• The web site needs to correctly describe the
  Extended Services Tool as application based.
• The Extended Services Tool provided on a specific
  ECHO versions web site needs to be modified to
  be in synch with that version in terms of
  defaults and capabilities.

21
Web Services Roadmap 2005
Results
? Improved Information Sharing
? Accelerated Research System Cost Savings
? Increased Collaboration Interdisciplinary
Science
? Increased PI Participation in Information
Production
? Increased Data Utilization
Outcome
? Geospatial services established
? Open geospatial services proliferate
? Production quality geospatial services
? Intelligent Services
Output
Capability
? Parameter-based product searches and access
? Automatic service mediation
? Semantic geospatial search access
? Full geospatial logical searches and access
Assisted Discovery Mediation
? Local processing data exchange
? Basic data tailoring services (data as service)
? Interoperable geospatial services(analysis as
service)
? Metadata-driven data fusion (semantic service
chaining)
Interoperable Information Infrastructure
Technology
? Geospatial service catalog established (WSDL,
UDDI)
? Common geospatial schema adopted (GML, ESML)
? Open geospatial ontology converges (OWL)
? Open data access established (OpenDAP, OGC)
Data
? Standard workflow language infused (BPEL)
? Common service protocol, description adopted
(SOAP, WSDL)
? Open service protocols established (HTTP, REST)
? Unified security identity management
(WS-Security, SAML)
Messaging
22
Web Services Roadmap 2007 Update
Results
? Improved Information Sharing
? Accelerated Research System Cost Savings
? Increased Collaboration Interdisciplinary
Science
? Increased PI Participation in Information
Production
? Increased Data Utilization
? Automated Data Utilization
Outcome
? Geospatial services established
? Open geospatial services proliferate
? Production quality geospatial services
? Intelligent Services
Output
Capability
? Parameter-based product searches and access
? Automatic service mediation
? Semantic geospatial search access
? Full geospatial logical searches and access
Assisted Discovery Mediation
? Local processing data exchange
? Basic data tailoring services (data as service)
? Interoperable geospatial services(analysis as
service)
? Metadata-driven data fusion (semantic service
chaining)
Interoperable Information Infrastructure
Technology
? Geospatial service catalog established (WSDL,
UDDI)
? Common geospatial schema adopted (GML)
? Open geospatial ontology converges (OWL)
? Open data access established (OpenDAP, OGC)
Data
? Standard workflow language infused (BPEL)
? Common service protocol, description adopted
(SOAP, WSDL)
? Open service protocols established (HTTP, REST)
? Unified security identity management
(WS-Security, SAML)
Messaging
23
Technology InfusionSemantic Web Sub-Group

• Subgroup Lead
• Peter Fox
• HAO/ESSL/NCAR

24
Semantic Web Subgroup

• Developed Semantic Web Roadmap
• Aligned to Capability Vision
• Aligned to the Web Services Roadmap
• Created hype cycle for semantic web technologies
• Presented tutorials on semantic web at ESDS WG,
  ESIP Fed winter and summer meetings,
  demonstrations, etc.

25
Semantic Web Roadmap
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
? Improved Information Sharing
? Revolutionizing how science is done
? Acceleration of Knowledge Production
? Increased Collaboration Interdisciplinary
Science
Results
Outcome
? Geospatial semantic services established
? Autonomous inference of science results
? Scientific semantic assisted services
? Geospatial semantic services proliferate
Output
? Some common vocabulary based product search and
access
? Semantic agent-based integration
? Semantic agent-based searches
? Semantic geospatial search inference, access
Assisted Discovery Mediation
Capability
? Local processing data exchange
? Metadata-driven data fusion (semantic service
chaining), trust

• Interoperable geospatial services(analysis as
  service), results explanation service

? Basic data tailoring services (data as
service), verification/ validation
Interoperable Information Infrastructure
? SWEET core 1.0 based on GCMD/CF
? SWEET core 2.0 based on best practices decided
from community
? SWEET 3.0 with semantic callable interfaces via
standard programming languages
? Reasoners able to utilize SWEET 4.0
Technology
Vocabulary
? RDF, OWL, OWL-S
? Geospatial reasoning, OWL-Time
? Numerical reasoning
? Scientific reasoning
Languages/ Reasoning
Near Term (0-2 yrs)
Current
Mid Term (2-5 yrs)
Long Term (5 yrs)
26
Semantic Web Roadmap (expanded capability)
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
Capability
? Some common vocabulary based product search and
access
? Semantic agent-based integration
? Semantic agent-based searches
? Semantic geospatial search inference, access
Assisted Discovery Mediation
? Common terminology captured in ontologies,
crossing domains
? Provenance/ annotation with ontologies in user
tools
? Ontologies for data mining, visualization and
analysis emerging/ maturing
? Some metadata and limited provenance available
Assisted Knowledge Building
? Verification is manual with minimal tool support
? Domain and range properties in ontologies used
in tools
? Service ontologies carry quality provenance
? Ontologies for information quality developed
Verifiable Information Quality
? Services must be hardwired and service
agreements established
? Services annotated with resource descriptions
? Dynamic service discovery and mediation, and
data scheduling
? Semantic markup of data latency (time lags)
which adapt dynamically
Responsive Information Delivery
? Local processing data exchange
? Basic data tailoring services (data as
service), verification/ validation

• Interoperable geospatial services(analysis as
  service), results explanation service

? Metadata-driven data fusion (semantic service
chaining), trust
Interoperable Information services
? Shared terminology for the visual properties of
interface objects and graph types...
? Tag properties, non-jargon vocabulary for
non-specialist use
? Semantic fields to describe tag key modal
functions.
? Limited metadata passed to analysis applications
Interactive Data Analysis
? Key data access services are semantically
mediated
? Access mediated by common ontologies
? Access mediated by agreed standard
vocabularies, hard-wired connections
? Mediation aided by services with domain/ range
properties
Seamless Data Access
Near Term (0-2 yrs)
Current
Mid Term (2-5 yrs)
Long Term (5 yrs)
27
Hype Cycle for Semantic Web
2007 Hype Cycle for Emerging Semantic Web
Technologies v0.2
28
Technology InfusionSensor Web Sub-Group

• Subgroup Lead
• Karen Moe
• ESTO

29
Sensor Web Concept View (2007)
Image from the NASA report ESTO AIST Sensor Web
Technology Meeting Feb 2007
30
Sensor Web Subgroup Objectives

• Provide a technology infusion forum for the ESTO
  Advanced Information Systems Technology (AIST)
  principal investigators
• 35 projects of varying duration (1, 2 and 3
  years)
• Projects initiated Aug 06 - Jan 07
• Participation is voluntary
• Subgroup started March 2007
• Telecon each 4th Tuesday at 200 pm eastern
• Dial in 800-988-9494 Passcode 85139
• AIST Sensor Web sensorweb_at_lists.sciencedatasystems
  .org
• SensorWeb collaboration site http//teambps.mywss
  site.com/seeds/wg/infusion/sensorweb/default.aspx

31
Sensor Web Subgroup Activities

• Developed material for sensor web tutorial
• Presented at the ESIP Fed summer meeting July 07
• Limited assessment of use cases
• Jointly addressing sensor web metrics with
  Metrics WG
• Telecons and meetings held (e.g. session at the
  NASA Science Technology Conference 2007) to
  explore the evolving definition of sensor web
  concepts and implications for defining success
  metrics
• Overlapping themes - Web Services and Semantics
• Plans to develop use cases
• Ecology/ land use
• Weather
• Disaster Response
• And develop a sensor web wiki

32
Sensor Web Metrics

• Two perspectives on metrics
• Measure to what degree a system approaches/meets
  the sensor web definition (or ideal)
• Measure utility of the sensor web system
  (performance, productivity, usability)
• Current ideas
• Explore the usefulness of developing a sensor
  web readiness level assessment mechanism, ala
  TRL (technology readiness level)
• Decompose sensor web concepts/components into
  identifiable, and perhaps measurable, sensor web
  levels
• Seek measures of the utility factor, for example
  
• Performance (e.g. response time)
• Productivity (e.g. outcome metrics like
  publications, new capability, cost improvement,
  on-demand data acquisition, new products/
  products on demand, new users, impact of
  standards use)
• Usability (time spent on task, accessibility)
• Joint session with Metrics on Thursday morning

33
Sensor Webs and WGISS

• Committee on Earth Observing Satellites (CEOS) -
  Working Group on Information Systems and Services
  (WGISS)
• CEOS committed support to the international Group
  on Earth Observations (GEO) to demonstrate the
  role of remote sensing satellites to global
  observation systems
• CEOS pursuing Virtual Constellations and WGISS
  embraced the GEO sensor web task
• Task team exploring potential joint
  demonstrations
• Show power of the sensor web approach for
  selected scenarios
• Use available assets from members - decision
  support systems, in situ sensor networks, mobile
  sensors, flight instruments and data, analysis
  and prediction systems
• Assess interoperability protocols
• Register services

34
Technology Infusion Breakout Sessions
35
TIWG Breakout Agenda

• Tuesday, Oct 23, 2007
• TIWG breakout 1, 130 330
• Selection of new community co-chair
• Discussion - future technology focus and new key
  technology areas for evaluation
• TIWG breakout 2, 400 - 500
• Web services registries
• Use Cases
• Wednesday, Oct 24, 2007
• AM - Joint working groups session. TIWG topics
  sensor webs and emerging technology tracking
  (hype cycle del.icio.us)
• Thursday, Oct 25, 2007
• 830 930 Joint meeting with metrics working
  group on metrics for sensor web and web services
• 1000 1030 Joint meeting with reuse working
  group on reuse readiness levels (similar to TRLs)
• TIWG Breakout 3 1030 - 1200
• Review of subgroups, goals and objectives for
  2008
• How to better work with the larger community -
  relationships with other groups e.g. GEOSS