Collaboration within an Event based Computing Paradigm

1
Collaboration within an Event based Computing
Paradigm

• 15 February 2001 Indiana University
• Geoffrey Fox
• Florida State University
• Department of Computer Science and
• CSIT (School of Computational Science and
  Information Technology)
• 400 Dirac Science Library
• Tallahassee
• Florida 32306-4120
• fox_at_csit.fsu.edu

2
Introduction

• Build web-based support for people to interact
  with each other and with other resources
  computers, documents, instruments
• This was originally called a Collaboratory by
  Bill Wulf in a famous Science article in volume
  261, 13 Aug 1993
• We must do this while technology is rapidly
  changing and while we are not certain what
  collaborative tools, scientists will actually use
  i.e. requirements are not known
• We will find a set of successful existing
  capabilities where some consensus exists as to
  what they do and how they look to users these
  are typically (now) commercialized
• We will see that a somewhat different computing
  paradigm is suggested to support collaborative
  systems one that is explicitly message based
  and we will start with this MyXoS

3
Legacy from the Distant Past

• What have we learnt from parallel computing,
  clusters and the Internet?
• Message Passing Rules
• Note an event is just a message with (an
  optional) time stamp and typically (but not
  necessarily) an active (interrupt) message
  processing paradigm
• Message passing enables modularity, fault
  tolerance, distribution

4
A Lesson from UNIX, Windows, Yahoo

• Structured information is always labeled as a
  hierarchy with symbolic links e.g.
  //A(homeroot)/B/C/D .

We havesearch engines for unstructured
information
Symbolic Links
5
Confirmed by ADL and W3C DOM

• DoDs advanced distributed learning effort (and
  IMS more academic consortium) use a tree
  structure for educational material in SCORM
• http//www.adlnet.org
• Add educational specific tags like prerequisites
  and completion requirements
• Node of tree is called block
• W3C DOM is at times a document object model but
  it is really general object instance looked at
  as a tree
• The basic XML Node is extended for each XML
  artifact (element, atttribute ..) in appropriate
  ways
• For HTML, one has further extensions for each
  tag (ltbodygt ltformgt ltagt etc.)
• Consider world as a bunch of trees with domain
  dependent extensions

6
XML DTD Structure for Block Element
Internal Node
Leaf Node
7
Example Tree based Course Structure
8
More on Trees

• ADL have an educational hierarchy with
  extensions for the rest of the world
• Rather one should have a general tree with
  extensions for documents, people, education,
  computers, events,transactions .
• One must as always distinguish location from
  name from type of node
• Location and name are in general distinct
  hierarchies
• Xlink/Xpath would normally identify an object
  component (value of an element) by hierarchical
  external location (URL) and hierarchical internal
  name (id or tag sequence for DOM)

9
MetaObject Event-based Computing Paradigm

• All entities are MetaObjects defined in universal
  GXOS XML Syntax Meta means GXOS doesnt really
  want to manage Object, just information required
  to find, render and share it
• Rendering includes Palm devices as well as PCs
• Entities are people, computers, data sources,
  information from e-mail, scientific visualization
  to digitized Bible
• All actions including object changes are events
  all events are GXOS objects
• e-mail, paging etc. are all GXOS events uniformly
  routed/archived etc.
• All action is instantiated or recorded in
  messages which are events themselves
• All events are archived allowing actions to be
  undone and to be reviewed
• There is an MetaObject Shell MyXoS with basic
  Services (copy, create, collaborate etc.)
• Discovery etc. via Jini/Napster mechanisms

10
GXOS GNDI Structure I

• Typically GXOS does NOT hold the object but
  rather all the metadata for object including
  where to find it
• internalND (XML/EJB) defines where the metadata
  is (GNDI Garnet Naming/Directory)
• externalND where the object is (JNDI Java
  Naming/Directory Interface or CORBA or COM or
  SOAP)
• Idea used in WebFlow/Gateway portals implies
  efficient as use natural high performance
  mechanisms for real objects
• GXOS uses classic UNIX style directory structure
  such as //Education/University/FSU/CS/PhD/Course/L
  ecture
• Structure says can handle quadrillion
  meta-objects//Jefferson/HallD/Run1/May132005/Tape
  5/Event1234/Detector3
• Events are a special type of GXOS object defined
  with GMS Extension to basic hierarchical object

11
GXOS GNDI Structure II

• The more you know about an object, the easier it
  is to build a collaborative system
• It is hard to share a general program as
  properties are not explicit
• You put in GXOS metadata precisely those
  properties that need to be shared
• All GXOS objects can be containers as well as
  having full object characteristics
• Unlike UNIX where directories (only containers)
  and files (never explicit containers) are
  different
• Can create a link (internalND pointer) with a
  profile to define special properties of this
  object in a new context
• Intelligent symbolic links
• One links User, Client Device to VE (Virtual
  Environment) with XML profiles mapping user to
  this session --gt Universal Access

12
GXOS Schema
See http//aspen.csit.fsu.edu/users/ozgur/docs/gxo
s/
http//aspen.csit.fsu.edu/project/cctools/jmsevent
api.xls
13
Overall Structure of GXOS for a MegaMeeting
EventArchive
Capabilities
Global Root
Users
Devices
Documents
Admin
Multimedia
Have a hierarchy of MegaMeetings(any collection
of meetings)
MegaMeeting
Meeting
Meeting
Meeting
14
Structure of GXOS For a Collaborative Session
Meeting
An ApplicationSupporting GMS
GNDI Links
Users
Devices
GNDI Links
Sharedlets
Capabilities
Sharedlet3
Sharedlet1
Sharedlet2
VE is VirtualEnvironment
15
Collaboratory Applications

• Distance Education including advanced seminars
  and training
• Help Desk including
• Microsoft helping user debug problem on home PC
  (connected to Internet)
• MSRC consulting staff interacting over distance
  in real time with a user with a program bug
• Yahoo staff asking in depth questions from users
  browsing either their knowledge or Shopping sites
• Scientists brainstorming difficult research
  issues in distributed locations
• Virtual communities around the world from
  children chatting to each other or integration of
  distributed organizations (like ARL)
• Indian Nation remaining in their homeland but
  participating electronically in modern economy
  (digital.indigineousworld.org)
• Implementing next round of PET activities
• Crisis Management and Command and Control for
  Military

16
Goals and Features of Garnet

• Support distance education, collaborative
  computing and building electronic communities
• Uses desktop (HearMe VOIP, Polycomm) Conferencing
  or Access Grid at higher end
• Garnet has a low-end heritage
• Builds on lessons from Tango (Syracuse) and
  commercial NetMeeting WebEx Placeware Centra etc.
• Integrate synchronous and asynchronous
  collaboration
• Integrate concept of a portal (web interfaces to
  applications) with collaboration
• Supports universal access including PDAs
  collaborating with desktops
• PDA Control of device or PDA alternative kiosk
  access gotten as a collaborative session between
  device and PDA

17
Publish/Subscribe Collaboration

• The web is full of objects web pages sitting
  on web servers and these support asynchronous
  collaboration
• You post a web page and I later look at it in my
  own time
• Replacing web document by a CGI script or
  servlet (web interface to program, database etc.)
  gives general multi-tier object sharing
• This is Publish/Subscribe mechanism
• If add some mechanism (automatic email or word of
  mouth) to tell viewing client when new
  information is posted
• We build on JMS (Java Message Service) as
  Industry standard for publish/subscribe systems
• Synchronous Collaboration provides real-time
  notification and automatic update of changed
  objects
• JMS seems fast enough to do real-time

18
JMS Structure
Global (distributed) Event Receptor (Queue)
PDAwith JMS
Subscribe
PDAwithout JMS
HHMS
Publish
Convert Eventsto JMS
HHMS Optimized for Performance. Assume complex
(XML) processingdone on personal server
JavaScript
Java
C ..
17 Nov 2000
19
JMS Latency
20
JMS Latency
21
Bandwidth of JMS
22
Bandwidth of JMS
23
Garnet Architecture Underpinnings

• All software written in Java (EJB) all data
  structures defined in XML GXOS
• Unified Event Model assume all systems
  communicate with XML based messages (possibly
  wrapped) universal rendering portalML
• All entities client and server devices, users,
  programs -- defined in XML resourceML
• All events archived to enable fault tolerance and
  replay
• GMS -- Garnet(Grid?) Message Service -- extends
  JMS to XML not text properties to allow server
  side intelligence
• Assume clients can crash but servers persistent

24
GMS Model for Messages

• Agent based messaging with server (broker) side
  intelligence and archiving

Subscribes to all events to getpersistence
AgentcombinesMessage PropertiesSubscriber
Requeststo decide onmessage recipient
Central Knowledge
ServerMessage Input Queue
SubscriberProfiles
GMS Garnet Message Servicebuilt on commercial
JMS
Set via GMS
Publishers
Subscribers
25
Requirements of Collaboration I

• We have learnt a lot from our own experiments
  (systems called Tango (synchronous) and
  WebWisdom/Virtual Classroom Manager
  (asynchronous))
• and from study of commercial models
• NetMeeting, WebEx Centra and Placeware (and
  others) have evolved to more or less identical
  synchronous models
• Yahoo, Excite, NetCenter are asynchronous
  information portals
• WebCT and Blackboard are asynchronous education
  portals
• New systems like Groove and concepts like MOOs
  which appear to have limited popularity
• Why are bulletin boards not used in place of
  simple email?
• e.g. in Grid Forum

26
Requirements of Collaboration II

• Need to support both synchronous and
  asynchronous models in an integrated fashion
• Some think asynchronous web based education will
  replace conventional methods
• Maybe role of synchronous (teacher-student
  interaction) shifts from lecturing to mentoring
• Implies need to archive synchronous sessions for
  later replay
• Implies build collaborative portals
• Need to support PDA and PC seamlessly
• Define content in XML and use style-sheets or
  other transformation tools to map into HTML (PC)
  or WML (PDA)
• This is part of portalML
• Collaboration implies sharing objects the
  better object structure exposed, the better
  sharing is possible
• So define everything you can in XML (ResourceML)
• We can share Word/PowerPoint best in Web or SVG
  form as this is universal export. Could build a
  custom office sharing tool but hard

27
Requirements of Collaboration III

• Predict that future will see higher quality web
  pages as Web allows more competition (e.g.
  between education providers)
• So need to understand how to share pages written
  with Macromedia Flash and other high end
  authoring tools
• Need to migrate to evolving standards whether
  sure things like SMIL (multimedia) or W3C
  Universal Access or possibles like OpenOffice or
  WML
• Must assume all commercial and indeed academic
  products will evolve (rapidly) and so generic
  collaboration framework strongly preferred
• Special requirements of Science and HPCC
• Share Mathematics (MathML) and other science
  symbols (e.g. molecules) in scientific whiteboard
  etc.
• Share Computing (submit jobs, visualization etc.)

28
Aspects of Collaboration

• Collaboration means Sharing and we identify three
  classes of capability
• Share the people Audio/Video Conferencing
• Basic Tools email, Instant Messenger, Bulletin
  Boards, White board
• Shared resources i.e. shared objects (Basic tools
  are special case where object is a text message
  or simple drawing)
• Objects can be shared in several ways
• Shared display
• Shared export
• Shared event
• Which trade off ease of use versus flexibility
  versus ease of implementation
• If we share objects and we have a lot of them,
  then we must have management capabilities so we
  can store and retrieve them
• Management issues have special needs in some
  areas e.g. store grades and homework in learning
  systems

Everything is implicitly an ObjectNeed to make
that explicit forCollaboration Systems
29
Collaborative Visualization

• Consider a computer program (object above) and
  then its output and input wend their way through
  multiple filters(tiers) until they are finally
  rendered onsome sort of device CAVE through
  PDA.
• One can share object at any stage in pipeline

30
Architecture of Collaboration II

• All forms of Collaboration are Event based
• Different modes Display, Export, Event
  correspond to events generated at different
  places in object realization/rendering pipeline
• Shared Display Events contain updates to frame
  buffer
• Shared Event Events contain updates to state
  of either original or transformed object
• Shared Dynamic Export Convert (rendering of)
  object to some standard form that is more
  flexible than bitmap of Shared Display. Build a
  custom sharing for this exported form
• WebEx uses patented sharing of virtual printer
  which is equivalent to sharing export to PDF
• I like shared HTML (web pages) or SVG described
  later

31
Architecture of Collaboration III
Pub/SubServer
Receive eventson subscribedchannels
PostEvents
Subscribe
Exported Object
SubscribingObject II
SubscribingObject I

• Objects are all copies of each other with
  events maintaining state
• Result can be identical or different renderings
  e.g. one can choose on subscribing client to
  resize rendering to a larger (so can see) or
  smaller (as PDA) size

32
Architecture of Collaboration IV
This is replicated between each collaborating
client.It is frame buffer,original
object,Web/SVG/PDF/.. Exportfor Shared
display, eventand export models respectively
Transform
Render

• For each collaborative model, we are sharing and
  replicating an object
• We just need to choose which version of original
  object to use

33
Important Concepts in Initial Garnet

• Standard stuff built in shared display,
  whiteboard, HearMe control, quizzes, annotations,
  chat (Jabber.org)
• Must be able to record and replay all features of
  session (SMIL)
• A/V, Presentation, Annotations, Text Chat
• Developing SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics) Shared
  Export
• 2D Scientific Visualization/Whiteboard
• Macromedia (FlashSVG) and Adobe (already)
• Initial source of SVG Convert PowerPoint VML to
  SVG
• Would give shared export model for PowerPoint
  with each client able to scale independently at
  high resolution
• Shared Java Server Pages for Gateway Computing
  Portal
• Universal Access and support of Palm/Windows CE
  Clients
• Java based MyProfessor or MyCommunity Yahoo
  Messenger like interface

34
Summary of Architecture

• Multi-tier with resourceML to define Objects and
  portalML to define client server interface and
  dissociate Object and its rendering
• Server side logic to allow range of clients and
  exploit increasing network bandwidth
• Automatically gives universal archiving
• Publish/Subscribe can be used as universal
  mechanism for synchronous and asynchronous
  collaboration
• only need latencies of fractions of a second
  as this built already due to browser update time,
  long distance transmission time etc. (JMS
  latencies around 0.1 second for modest size
  message going from publisher to subscriber)
• Will need multicast (not in JMS) to scale to lots
  of clients
• Naturally supported by event based model of
  computing with all transactions expressed as time
  stamped messages (events) which are archived and
  forwarded by middle tier

35
myIndiana Portal Interface

• Yahoo Messenger is an interesting model for the
  myAG or more generally myProfessor (Education) or
  myHPCC (general computing) interface
• Small Application that invokes browser
• Runs on PC or Palmtop and only contains summary
  information suitable for Palms can we use Java
  (J2ME)
• Has services like file manipulation, send a
  message and set of custom buttons
• Access News, Weather, Stocks etc.
• Develop myHPCC with computers, papers, programs
  and sensors instead of news and stocks
• Develop myProfessor with school events, classes
  etc.

36
Typical Shared Information

• Allow customizable skins in portalML
• Allow auditorium participant interface as in
  Placeware

Control buttons for Audio/Video/Floor Control etc.
Lecture Page superimposed on a Java White
Board Annotations (student, teacher) Pointers etc.
IndexManageInfo
Alert/Raise Hands
Video or HearMecontrols or ..
Chat Room/IM
Invoke Quiz
37
Typical MyProfessor Interface

• Messages will give you access to email, instant
  messenger, voice messages, alerts etc.
• Agents scan for useful resources you requested
  e.g. news about Enterprise Javabeans
• Calendar and Scheduler supports CDIS, CAP and CIP
  data Interchange, access and Interoperability
  standards (see iPlanet Calendar Server 2.1)

38
Audio-Video Conferencing

• In Tango training, audio-video conferencing was
  always problematical. Current commercial systems
  quite flaky
• Video may or may not be necessary Internet only
  supports postage stamp talking heads
• Audio only requires a few kilobits per second but
  quality of service critical and not likely to be
  supported on current Internet
• HearMe desktop audio Support general mix of
  internet and ordinary phone lines which have
• Quality of service and good echo canceling etc.
  on high-end phones
• Should work with modem (28.8 kilobits per second)
• Access-Grid community audio/video Supports
  multiple high-quality audio and video streams
• Each client client needs 20 megabits per second

39
Authoring

• Authoring on the Web can include
• Basic HTML
• Macromedia/Adobe/etc. packages like Fireworks,
  Dreamweaver, Illustrator
• PowerPoint and Word exported
• Also can include RealNetworks or Microsoft or ..
  Format Multimedia
• Note Streaming multimedia formats have larger
  buffers than A/V conferencing formats
• Pressure to improve web quality
• Training and Education need a lot of material
  and so custom editing of each page not practical
• Using XML to specify content and include this in
  beautiful framework seems best
• SVG and SMIL are 2D vector graphics and
  multimedia standards
• HTML does not give reproducible pages
• Flash can be thought of as proprietary SVG

40
Macromedia Flash is Premier Web Authoring Tool?
Vector Graphics EnsuresScalableImages
41
Peer to Peer P2P B2B B2P

• Napster, GrooveNetworks, Entropia etc. have
  popularized peer to peer concepts
• Not clear what this means as implementations are
  naturally server based and Gilders law says
  Servers should be efficient
• At Demo 2001, XDegrees of Mountain View, Calif.,
  will preview a new Internet service that allows
  applications and business processes to
  automatically locate one another on the Web. The
  company plans to demonstrate how its service can
  be used by turning Microsoft Outlook into a
  p-to-p application by embedding an applet in
  Microsoft Explorer. XDegrees offers its software
  as a service whereas other platforms, such as
  Groove's, require downloading a client
• Meanwhile, Consilient, in Berkeley, Calif., will
  preview its namesake platform for linking
  business processes in a peer-to-peer
  architecture. Scheduled to be available in March,
  Consilient is built around Java and makes use of
  a Sitelet client code, XML containers, and Java
  to create a p-to-p infrastructure for any given
  set of processes, said company President Erik
  Freed.

42
Technology Trends and Principles

• All performance and capability measures of
  infrastructure continue to improve
• Gilders law says that network bandwidth
  increases 3 times faster than CPU Performance
  (Moores Law)
• The Telecosm eclipses the Microcosm .

George Gilder Telecosm How Infinite Bandwidth
Will Revolutionize Our World (September 2000,
Free Press ISBN 0684809303, 146 in Amazon
Sales Jan 15 2001)
43
B2B becomes Collaborative

• Ariba Inc., the largest of the business-to-busines
  s software companies, is expanding its product
  line with a planned 2.4 billion stock purchase
  of Agile Software Inc. Ariba Acquisition
• Agile makes software for what is being called
  "collaborative manufacturing," in which companies
  that change their products frequently use the
  Internet to work with their suppliers, among
  others, to better plan for those changes.
• It is the latest B-to-B offering to promise
  greatly increased efficiencies for customers --
  though it is not yet clear when, or if, the
  technology will make good on the expectations
  people have for it. Earlier B-to-B products, like
  "exchange" commerce sites used for online buying
  and selling were all the rage a year ago, but
  have disappointed many investors.

44
P2P Hype Lessons

• One wishes to enable on the Internet edge
  resources (computer cycles, files, users) to be
  linked together
• Napster implements Web based NFS (Network File
  System) for self defining music objects (.mp3 has
  audio plus metadata)
• GXOS provides the missing metadata for all the
  file types (.txt .doc .jpg etc.) which are not
  self defining
• Thus MyXoS could implement general Napster like
  services
• Jini mechanism could be used to allow distributed
  meta-objects to federate together
• You have lots of instances of MyXoS running on
  disconnected machines each in charge of their
  own set of GXOS MetaObjects
• Enabling network connections, these instances
  would announce themselves and lease the
  metadata under their control

45
Hand Held Internet

• So we will have convenient hand-held devices
  linked to the wireless internet
• Wireless Internet is basically the same as
  conventional Internet except that content is
  optimized for size and communication limitations
  of wireless systems
• Current bandwidth is around 14.4 kbaud poor
  modem
• Maybe WAN Cellphone bandwidth will be limited for
  near future
• Bluetooth standard should give hand-held
  devices megabit per second communication
  bandwidth for LAN
• Two positives for the wireless hand-held device
• Cheaper than a PC (relevant for students)
• More portable and more pervasively useable than a
  PC
• Grid on the Go Meeting May 2001

46
Collaborative Palm Tops

• Shared Display Share pixels between clients
• Shared Event Share URL between clients in
  general have different versions (WAP for
  Palm-top, HTML/HTTP for PCs) of display
  controlled by same XML content

Collaboration Server
URL or (scaled)frame buffer
..
HTTP-HTML
WAP
Web Server
47
Hand Held devices and Device Control

• Ubiquitous access to resources from palm-top
  devices will allow new HPCC access modes from
  simple job submission through visualization of
  results
• Implement as collaboration between Palmtops and
  vizdevices
• Control large screendisplays Banksand
  Erlebacher
• Control active walls ofFlat Panel screens
• Note by 2005 65 of Broadband Internetaccess
  expected to befrom non desktop devices

48
Two Hand Held Prototypes

• Latest release of VNC (public domain shared
  display) for Palm tops is quite impressive fast
  and includes server side resizing for reducing
  shared display for smaller hand held display
• We have a prototype of a Java client in a Palm
  controlling 3D object on PowerWall through a
  wireless connection

PalmVNC
49
Real Time Collaborative Systems

• Real time situations demand immediate response
  from anywhere expert
• spacecraft reports unexpected problem
• IMT test surprise
• Commanders or field personnel in Crisis
  Management
• Scientific analysis during aftershocks of
  Earthquake
• Collaboration (must bring in special expert) and
  support of diverse displays maybe critical
  person only has Palmtop are particularly
  important in these application
• Synchronous and asynchronous

50
page
ALARM
Caltech
quake location, size --
page
disloc
disp
JPL
sorted station potential --
modem
Dial Stations(and database)
USGS
station raw files --
page
WAKE UP!
GIPSY/auto_p
JPL
station motions --
JPL
disloc
simplex
JPL
--maps for civil authorities
single-fault model
multi-fault model
Virtual_California
Boulder (University of Colorado)
web simplex
JPL
--graphics --refined fault model
collaboration
--graphics --hazard model
51
SharedBrowserof Simulation Results
Will become myACES
Chatroom
Shared map of faults/sensors
SCEC Demo (Sept 99)Collaboration in GEM
Earthquake Analysis System
Conferencing
52
Collaborative Portal
Persistent Store of Earthquake Data
Simulations
ResourceML
Real Time control And sensor data
Asynchronous Access
Store
Real time Share
CollaborativemyACES
Synchronous Distributed Science
PersonalServer
PortalML
Client
HTML WML/WAP Rendering Standards
53
A Sample Collaboratory

• Here is a sample collaboratory designed for
  HallD a proposed experiment at DoEs
  Jefferson Laboratory
• HallD produces 1015 data or simulation objects
  per year
• HallD involves hundreds of scientists around the
  country collaborating in taking data, processing
  it and analyzing it to find nifty science
  breakthroughs
• One first would establish HallD Digital Object
  Standard covering everything from LED on
  experimental apparatus, data produced in each
  part of apparatus, plots and other analysis
  artifacts, presentations and papers
• GNDI Organizes systematically in natural
  hierarchical fashion and it will be efficient

54
MyHallD Collaborative Portal

• MyHallD is the portal door to the
• Virtual HallD Experiment Control Room
• Virtual HallD Monte Carlo Farm
• Virtual HallD DST Factory
• Virtual HallD Physics Engine
• Virtual HallD Board Room
• HallD Education and Outreach Area
• These share access to 1015 HallD digital objects
  but access (and make) them in different ways and
  are optimized in different ways
• They share certain features and services
• All actions are archived as GMS Events (in XML)
• Common security infrastructure
• Access can be from PC or Hand Held device

55
Features of MyHallD and its HallD Virtual Places

• MyHallD would have
• Handles to open 6 Community Virtual Places as
  well as ability to open private virtual rooms
• HallD/Jefferson/HEP Calendar, Phone lists etc.
• News Items with browser links
• Experiment Status etc.
• Invoke basic Collaboration Tools Internet
  Phone Local and remote cameras Chat Whiteboard
• Automatic Update (to myHallD) Feature
• Indicator as to which places you are in and who
  else is active there.
• To do list for you in HallD
• Gentle and Crass ways of getting peoples
  attention

56
Features of Virtual MyHallD Places

• HallD Board room can be done today for some
  capabilities using WebEx Placeware or Centra
• DST Factory and Monte Carlo Farm do not require
  significant synchronous collaboration build
  computing portals for standard Physics packages
• Need strong management functions
• HallD Physics Engine could benefit from
  innovative user interfaces and collaboration in
  analysis of results
• Here is where difficult decisions made (how to
  run Minuit optimization program) and distributed
  experts could be useful
• Share analysis results and choice of parameters
  for future large analysis (which partial waves to
  include)
• HallD Education and Outreach can use standard
  Virtual Classroom model

57
Features of Virtual MyHallD Places

• Virtual Experiment Control Room could be a big
  win as (unexpected) real-time decisions need
  experts-on-demand
• Similar model with DoD and IMT experiments or
  NASA for remote spacecraft mission control and
  real-time scientific analysis of earthquakes
• Needs to evaluate collaborative decision making
  (vote?) and planning tools
• Needs to allow shared streaming data as well as
  shared read-outs of experimental monitors (output
  of all devices must be distributed objects which
  can be shared)
• Needs to support experts caught on their sailboat
  with poor connectivity or in their car with just
  a cell phone and a PDA