Collaborative Management Environment Interlab99

1
Collaborative Management EnvironmentInterlab99
Mark Elmore, CME Technical Lead Collaborative
Technologies Research Center Computer Science and
Mathematics Division Oak Ridge National
Laboratory
2
Collaborative Technologies Research Center

• Major Research Projects, 1999
• Parts grouping
• Manufacturing Supply Chain
• Connectivity of disparate data (CME)

3
CME Web Presentation of Data

• Replacing a paper-based system with paperless
  desk-top delivery
• Data searching/representation
• Flexible (paper-like, tables, graphs, ???)
• Content-centric
• Customized
• On-the-fly
• Across data sources

4
Collaborative Management Environment Goals and
Objectives

• Create an environment to financially manage and
  analyze research funding
• Minimal impact to the laboratories
• Provide complete and consistent data to DOE
• Greatly increase the efficiency and usefulness of
  the proposal submission process
• Provide a safe and trusted environment
• Reuse information from proposals to populate the
  RD tracking database

5
Current System

• Field Work Proposals (FWPs) submitted to DOE are
  in paper books
• Weeks and thousands of dollars are spent in
  collating, copying, binding, and shipping these
  books
• The books provide very limited query and search
  capability
• This paper system makes management of research
  programs very difficult

6
Desired System

• Delivered to Desktop
• Secure
• Searchable
• Graphs
• Printable
• Data Flexibility (Distributed or Localized)

7
CME Pilot Goals

• Develop a pilot based on actual FWP data from
  labs
• Gather lab data
• Very limited resources from the labs
• Lab feedback
• We want the capability of CME, howeverthey have
  been burned before
• We will be unable to provide data in needed
  format due to lack of resource.

8
How do we get there from here?
Paperless Desired System
Paper Based Current System
9
A Closer Look

• Look closer at the ends of the desired system
• Current System
• Each lab is different
• Weak view
• Desired System
• Unified
• Powerful view

10
Current System1 Different Data

• Most fields overlap among labs FWPs
• However, unique fields exist on each labs FWP

11
Current System2 Different Data Formats

• Databases
• Spreadsheets
• Word Processor Files
• Combination of above

12
Current System3 Different Data Storage

• Centralized
• Distributed across desktops
• In between and Combinations

13
Desired System 1 Unified view

• View across FWPs and across labs
• View maximum intersection of disparate lab data
• View distributed data as if collected at a single
  location
• What else?

14
Desired System 2 More Power!

• Searching
• Graphing
• Web enhancements

15
Desired System3 Web Enhancements

• FWP as Sales Brochure
• Web less restricting than paper

16
Information Integration Alternatives

• Distributed relational databases (Data Warehouse)
• Too expensive for labs to setup and maintain
• Object Request Brokers
• Too expensive for labs
• Groupware (Lotus Notes)
• Too expensive for the labs
• Lack of flexibility in formats supported
• HTML and internet
• Difficult to store and manage structured data
• XML provides a possibility

17
Distributed Information through XML

• Strengths - We are at the ground level of this
  technology
• XML is the de-facto standard, accepted by
  Microsoft, Sun, IBM, and the software industry in
  general, tutorial at Interlab99
• XML allows simple storage of structured data
  (data and meta-data together)
• XML allows queries and data presentation
• Weakness - We are at the ground level of this
  technology
• XML is an evolving standard
• The tools to support XML are limited, and weak
• Supporting standards for data presentation are
  limited

18
Approach

• Data model developed with LANL, FNL, ORNL, and
  OSTI
• Reviewed by business systems experts as well as
  technical experts
• Pioneered use of XML as a means of storing,
  querying, and presenting FWP information.
• Simple data storage technology
• Very low costs to the labs, integration work done
  by CME team
• Very well received article at XML98

19
Sample FWP
20
CME Pilot Data Model Sample
21
CME Information Model
22
Same XML Data Type Definition
23
Sample XML file
24

25
Gathering Data from the Labs
Original Lab FWPs
Lab XML Format
26
New CME Tools Developed
Data Translation to XML
XML to SQL Generator
Original Lab FWPs
Lab XML Format
XML To HTML Generator
27
Future Vision
Lab XML Format
Original Lab FWPs
Lab XSL Format
28
CME I/O
XML files are data Input
Web Served GUI provides Output
29
GUI Log In Screen
30
GUI Simple Search Screen
31
GUI Advanced Search Screen
32
GUI Search Results
33
GUI Financial Graphs
34
GUI View FWP, UID/PWD
35
GUI View FWP
36
From I to OThe Full System
Architecture
GUI
XML
37
Full CME System
Lab FWP Structure
Operational
HTML Data
Web Server
CME Data Model
XML Data
Browser
HTTP
DTD
CME Client
Oracle Database
CME Server
Servlet
RMI
Lab FWP Reports
38
Key Pilot Milestones

• 1998 ORNL and LANL data in CME Pilot
• Gathered distributed information using XML
• Low-cost participation by ORNL and LANL, (only 2
  person-days from the lab is required!)
• Lab information presented in lab FWP format
• Capable of adding a new lab in 1 month or less
• Very strong interest in CME, limited lab resources

39
Extended Pilot Goals

• Add three labs to the CME system
• Strive for a wide representation over the DOE
  laboratory system
• Add OSTI to the development team
• Begin transition to production through training,
  and development of key database components
• Begin merger of CME and RD Tracking data models
• Prototype CME and RD Tracking interaction

40
Summary

• Challenges in distributed data, and low-cost lab
  participation
• Innovation
• Use of Extended Markup Language (XML) for
  low-cost information integration
• Extended Pilot has 1999 data from four labs, two
  more on the way

41
Future1 Industrial Strength CME?

• CME is research, proof-of-concept
• Presented to DOE
• Ernie Moniz, RD Council Chair
• Mike Telson, CFO
• John Gilligan, CIO

42
Future2 DOE SIM Process

• SIM is formal process conducted to determine if a
  CME approach is feasible as a DOE wide solution
• Actively solicits stakeholder input
• Memo pending

43
Future3 CME Research

• Add more labs
• Enhance GUI
• Agents
• Intelligent aids
• Grouping
• Find similar, outliers
• Apply CME technology elsewhere

44
Full CME System
Lab FWP Structure
Operational
HTML Data
Web Server
CME Data Model
XML Data
Browser
HTTP
DTD
CME Client
Oracle Database
CME Server
Servlet
RMI
Lab FWP Reports
45
Full CME System
Lab FWP Structure
Operational
HTML Data
Web Server
CME Data Model
fy
XML Data
Browser
HTTP
DTD
CME Client
Oracle Database
CME Server
Servlet
RMI
Lab FWP Reports
46
Lab FWP Structure
HTML Data
Web Server
CME Data Model
fy
XML Data
Browser
HTTP
DTD
CME Client
Oracle Database
CME Server
Servlet
RMI
Lab FWP Reports
47
Collaborative Management Environment
Lab FWP Structure
HTML Data
Web Server
CME Data Model
fy
XML Data
Browser
HTTP
DTD
CME Client
Oracle Database
CME Server
Servlet
RMI
Lab FWP Reports
48
Collaborative Management Environment
Lab FWP Structure
HTML Data
Web Server
CME Data Model
fy
XML Data
Mark Elmore, CME Technical Lead ElmoreMT_at_ornl.gov
Browser
HTTP
DTD
CME Client
Oracle Database
CME Server
Servlet
RMI
Lab FWP Reports
49
Collaborative Management Environment
Lab FWP Structure
HTML Data
Web Server
CME Data Model
fy
XML Data
Mark Elmore, CME Technical Lead ElmoreMT_at_ornl.gov
Browser
HTTP
DTD
CME Client
Oracle Database
CME Server
Servlet
CME Web Page http//www.csm.ornl.gov/ctrc/
cme
RMI
Lab FWP Reports
50
Collaborative Management Environment
fy
Mark Elmore, CME Technical Lead ElmoreMT_at_ornl.gov
CME Web Page http//www.csm.ornl.gov/ctrc/
cme
51
Collaborative Management Environment
fy
Mark Elmore, CME Technical Lead ElmoreMT_at_ornl.gov
CME Web Page http//www.csm.ornl.gov/ctrc/
cme