Evaluation of an Open-source Collaborative WebGIS Prototype in Risk Management with Students
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Formal Metadata
| Title |
| |
| Title of Series | ||
| Number of Parts | 183 | |
| Author | ||
| License | CC Attribution - NonCommercial - ShareAlike 3.0 Germany: You are free to use, adapt and copy, distribute and transmit the work or content in adapted or unchanged form for any legal and non-commercial purpose as long as the work is attributed to the author in the manner specified by the author or licensor and the work or content is shared also in adapted form only under the conditions of this | |
| Identifiers | 10.5446/32015 (DOI) | |
| Publisher | ||
| Release Date | ||
| Language | ||
| Producer | ||
| Production Year | 2015 | |
| Production Place | Seoul, South Korea |
Content Metadata
| Subject Area | ||
| Genre | ||
| Abstract |
|
00:00
MereologyInterpreter (computing)DepictionMultiplication signInstance (computer science)Software testingEvent horizonHypermediaDifferent (Kate Ryan album)TouchscreenChemical equationExistenceGroup actionSoftware developerStandard deviationCalculationConfidence intervalInterface (computing)Modal logicMeasurementPresentation of a groupBitTerm (mathematics)Computer programmingArithmetic meanSpacetimeExpressionStatisticsInheritance (object-oriented programming)Student's t-distributionINTEGRALService (economics)Statement (computer science)Observational studyInformationPairwise comparisonEnterprise architecturePosition operatorOpen setCondition numberContent (media)Mathematical analysisQuicksortPrototypeVector potentialInverse elementSoftware maintenanceLevel (video gaming)Dimensional analysisIdentifiabilityParameter (computer programming)Incidence algebraComputer-generated imageryElectronic mailing listInferenceMetropolitan area networkWave packetWorkstation <Musikinstrument>Form (programming)ConcentricWordBranch (computer science)ConsistencyPhysical systemDecision support systemGoodness of fitTelecommunicationSemantic WebSelf-organizationLinear regressionCircleDistanceInformation managementHand fanEquivalence relationElement (mathematics)Computing platform1 (number)CASE <Informatik>Range (statistics)AuthorizationUsabilityAreaType theoryLoginCollaborationismBuildingAnalogyProjective planeHazard (2005 film)DataflowSoftware frameworkCartesian coordinate systemUser interfaceOpen sourceFeedbackDenial-of-service attackLocal ringMultiplicationFunction (mathematics)Web 2.0Module (mathematics)Archaeological field surveyData structureProcess (computing)Dependent and independent variablesRankingBuffer overflowObject (grammar)Order (biology)Client (computing)Natural numberPeer-to-peerSummierbarkeitView (database)MappingScripting languageComputer animation
08:27
Expert systemBit rateSingle sign-onInterface (computing)Real number2 (number)WebsiteGroup actionLevel (video gaming)PlanningType theoryMeasurementInterpreter (computing)Open setMathematical analysisInformationNatural numberAssociative propertyWeightStudent's t-distributionVisualization (computer graphics)Multiplication signIntegrated development environmentTotal S.A.Interactive televisionWave packetScaling (geometry)Computing platformMereologyInformation managementPrototypeRankingSeries (mathematics)MappingBitPoint (geometry)SoftwareWeb 2.0Cartesian coordinate systemOpen sourceExterior algebraDifferent (Kate Ryan album)VideoconferencingSoftware testingPublic key certificateDecision support systemInclusion mapCondition numberSquare numberDistanceACIDNumbering schemePersonal digital assistantInternetworkingNumberParameter (computer programming)Centralizer and normalizerIndependence (probability theory)Standard deviationThermal expansionTime zonePerspective (visual)Connectivity (graph theory)Instance (computer science)Representation (politics)Power (physics)Pairwise comparisonSampling (statistics)Dimensional analysisData structureRevision controlContent (media)Presentation of a groupMessage passingInheritance (object-oriented programming)Physical systemExtension (kinesiology)Statement (computer science)Address spaceImplementationIntegerOrder (biology)Computer animation
16:51
Computer animation
Transcript: English(auto-generated)
00:03
Hello everyone, today I will present a part of my PhD research, which is the evaluation of a prototype for the open-source both webchains, a collaborative platform for the disaster and risk management, which we evaluated the prototype with a master student from
00:21
the University of Loser. So first, a bit of introduction of this platform and this kind of collaborative project is important. Actually, if we look into the risk management, we can see that there is a lot of good communication and collaboration between the different organizations, which are responsible in charge for the risk
00:46
prevention, mitigation and management. And actually, if we combine, if we could produce a different type of mitigation measure collectively and collaboratively, then it could produce a wide range of appropriate measures, which is more acceptable and appropriate for the community and also for the authorities.
01:06
And also by engaging different stakeholders in this type of platform, then we could already consider the different peers and performance of stakeholders in the decision-making process.
01:22
So the two main objectives of this collaborative decision-support prototype is firstly to assist and integrate the stakeholders in both for the formulations and summation of different types of mitigation measures, mainly oriented for the naturalizers such as
01:41
floods, landslide and overflow. And the second objective is to link the different responsible stakeholders in a participative and collaborative manner. For example, if there is a flood, then what kind of mitigation could be proposed in order to mitigate the flood in the region?
02:02
So for example, you could elevate the houses and if you relocate the houses and put the well beside the house, for example, those kind of measures. So this is just a brief overview of the background architecture of the platform. Well, now it's a prototype that is fully working and the background architecture is
02:25
based on the open source, open-source framework and its clients are developing through SDK. So if you see, we use for the database, we use the per-gns and per-screes. And for the application server, Apache target and the geo-server for the map.
02:44
And also some PHP script for the server-side scripting. And for the user interface for the framework, we use a geo-station, plus extensions, SGAs and open ones too.
03:01
So here, this is a brief overview of the main interface of the platform. So this is composed of three parts. So this first one is, this one is for the mapping where you could see some hazard embedding layer. This is a debris flow map for the small villages in the area.
03:20
And same of the bedding footprints as the exposure information. And this is the main navigation panel where you can see different tools, which is necessary for the square wave to perform. And in the cell, this is the main data view panel where we could see the information
03:40
of the data for the portal layer. So in this presentation, I will mainly emphasize for this module of the waste management. We also have a module for the waste assessment where you could calculate the waste interactively from the web geosphere platform. So based on this information, then in this waste management module,
04:06
there is a two step. The first one is different aspects so we can formulate what are the possible mitigation measures in the area through the web geosphere interface. And in the second stage, we could submit what is the best possible measures
04:23
using the multi criteria evaluation tool, which is a tool which we consider different criteria or more than the cost benefit analysis. So for example, the cost benefit analysis, we only consider the cost and what is the benefit of the certain mitigation measures.
04:41
But in the words of CE2, we can also consider some criteria, whether it's the agreement of local populations or whether it's the effort of certain measures in the area and so on. So that's why we use these multi criteria evaluation tools. And then the output is the ranking of the alternative,
05:00
which you can see from the different groups of stakeholders, which has been involved in the process. So actually in our project, we have the four case study areas in Europe. So in Italy, Poland, France and Romania.
05:21
So we presented this prototype to the stakeholders and the authorities. In these three case study areas, we collected the response and we found the platform is innovative, useful and supportive, but we still have to improve the user friendliness and practical aspect of the platform.
05:41
So we didn't test the platform really with the stakeholders, so that's why as a second stage, we tested this prototype with the NASA survey from our various teams. So this one, we show there is a three stage, which is a structure of the evaluation exercise,
06:03
where you can see in the stage one, an individual student, they are the undefined, where the area is raised, which is, they are being given a hazard map and a burden map, and then they have to say which area and which buildings are affected in the areas.
06:21
And then in the second stage, they formulate the possible measures to mitigate the risk in this area. And then in the third stage, they select the person that we have been defined as stage two. So there is also a group involved, you can see that there are students in different groups,
06:41
they pair the research analogies and special planners on the NASA Association, on the NOAA, and so on. And for the feedback of the platform, we collected the different feedback form, written feedback form, at the end of the stage, and then at the final end of the exercises.
07:02
So here now I'm going through the different stage now. So for the first stage, so when the user log in, the student can see that they have to go to these tools, and they have to visualize the map in the area, and then they identify which of the buildings
07:22
have been affected by the double flow. And then in the second stage, as you can see, there are one group of students, also geologists, they propose different type of mitigation measures in the area to protect their houses,
07:42
which has been affected in the area. So here in this group, they propose three mitigation measures. One is to make the retention basin, here, which is already existing in the area, to make the measures, and also to put some value on that,
08:01
in the slope, and also to put a protection for us in the area. So actually for this stage, there are two, three groups of students, and they propose their measure differently by logging into the platform. And for the third stage,
08:22
this is probably the most enjoyable stage for them, because in the stage, there are four groups, one is for the community representative, and second group is the mayor of the village, and the municipality council, and three groups, that group is for the experts group,
08:41
which is the region special planner, and four for the nature association. So in this stage, actually what they're doing is they just need to give the weight of the different criteria. For example, in their opinion, which criteria is the most important. For example, this group nature say,
09:02
okay, effort on the environment is the most important for us, so they give the weight as five, which is about 33% of the five criteria. And then they say, okay, for us, quotes of the measure is not really that important, so they give the weight as one.
09:21
And after giving the weight, then you can see already the ranking of the alternative, what we have proposed. So you see alternative, three is the most favorable solution, for this group, for the nature association, and also you can see in the interface, the different, on the right side,
09:41
the points of the, the weight of the different criteria, for the goals, for the effort on the local agreement of the population also. And in the platform, you can also see the different ranking, which has been produced by a different group of stakeholders,
10:01
for example, for this, the first one, for the community group, they think the alternative to a most favorable solution for them, and this is the same, they may act in the same key, but for the expert, which is the geologist, search for a planner, and the nature things, for them is the alternative,
10:21
three is the most favorable solutions, in the whole plan. So, for the fever questionnaire, actually there are two types of fever questionnaires I already introduced, the one which is the duty for the evaluation at every stage of the research site,
10:41
and then another one is the final one, which is at the end of the research sites. So, in every questionnaire, we have the open analysis question, which is more like, for example, at common, what is the research of which houses are affected in the areas, and so on, and also we also have some concerns
11:01
with the rating question, where you could get the scale of one to five, okay, for me, for example, how easy it is to find the information you need in the platform, and so on. So, here, I'm just showing you a part of the fever research,
11:21
a total of 21 questions, but here we listed only a few. So, as you can see, for example, a 3.5 score, which is more than enough, for how easy was to sketch the measures in the night interface. So, at the average score,
11:40
we would see 3.5. Also, we have to improve for this one as well. All right, but you can really see, for example, for the visualization of the time chart, and for the rating scale, it's very difficult score for this part of the interface.
12:00
And this is the final fever research of the prototype, which was at the end of the research site. So, as you can see from the chart, we really think that the platform is very useful in the score 4.5, and it's really supportive in full,
12:21
while the rest of the expert sessions will have to improve a little bit more, and the user certification achieved the score of 3.5. Naturally, I'd be able to improve the score a little bit more, because, actually, for the instance, we didn't improve any type of
12:42
health documentation and so on. maybe the student also commented that it might be better if we provide the same trainings or documentation or video explanation of the tools before the SSI that will be helpful for them.
13:01
And this is the fever research of the SSIs. So, actually, when we ask the questions, to the student, do you find this type of exercise an interesting for them? And do you think that this is useful for you to learn this management? And this SSI is,
13:23
does it refer to the real world situation or do you like to continue this type of interactive SSIs in the future? And when you see, actually we divided into two groups, and 75% of the students will have the experience in working with GIS before,
13:42
and they say, okay, for them, as you can see, the score is really high for all of them, while the score is really low for them. For the students, we will need more and fewer experience in GIS. For the, for all of them, they agree that
14:00
this SSI is very useful and it will reflect the real world risk management problems and what we can face, what we can face in solving these kind of problems in the future. So, for the discussions, actually, as I explained before,
14:21
the students with experience in GIS and in five classes, they responded very nicely and both show interest in continuing such kind of SSI in the future for their learning. And also, we have seen that this prototype is useful in depolarization support group
14:40
and risk management, while we still have to improve for the interface and we have to move the more information accessible and more iterative as well. And also, we will need to update for the tutorial documentation and the training session for the students before doing the SSI
15:01
and also to allocate more time for the discussion because the student will consider the webinars if they have no time to discuss at the end of the SSI. So, to be concluded, so for this presentation, it was based on the open source framework,
15:21
we used the open source software technologies, we integrated the web series based mapping interface with the decision support group, which is the multi-criteria evaluation tool for the ranking alternatives. This evaluation with student provided the further
15:40
improvement of the platform and also, for the movie, there is a potential application to use this platform in the future for the active manual students and then, it's allowed to reflect the real world situation when various
16:02
types of experience stakeholders are involved and risk management is important. So, in the near future, we plan to update this collaborative platform for the environmental course at the universe, then we will have more research for the testing
16:21
about 150 students. So, these are just the journal article, if you are interested, you could put it here. She is circulating, if you want. If you are interested, you check it. Any questions?
16:40
Just one person. Good, there is no person. We have the same time. Thank you. Thank you.