Naturnet newsletter06


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Naturnet newsletter06

  1. 1. Naturnet - Redime NEWSLETTER No. 6 December 2007 ContentFinal NNR Garp3 Modelling and Simulation Evaluation of QR Models Related to a SustainableWorkbench Release Catchment ManagementJochem Liem, Floris Linnebank Anders Bouwer Andreas Zitek, Stefan Schmutz and Susanneand Bert Bredeweg (University of Amsterdam, Muhar (University of Natural Resources andSeptember 2007) Applied Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria), Bert Bredeweg (University of Amsterdam), Paulo The university of Amsterdam has released a Salles (University of Brasilia)new version of the free Garp3 workbench forqualitative modelling and simulation in the final month Summary: The qualitative simulation modelsof the project. This will be the final release of Garp3 related to the sustainable development of the Kampin the context of the NaturNet-Redime project. The valley explore the following aspects (Zitek, 2006;usability and functionality of Garp3 has come a long Zitek et al., 2006). …way since the start of the project. … Page 10 Page 2 Uniform Resource Management as Tool forIntegrating Case Studies in a Large Qualitative Content Awareness of Information andModel on Sustainability Knowledge Inside CommunitiesPaulo Salles (University of Brasilia) and Bert Karel Charvat, Stepan Kafka, Marek SplichalBredeweg (University of Amsterdam) Uniform Resource Management (URM) As the NaturNet-Redime project reaches the provides a framework in which communities canend and its five case studies are finished, an share information and knowledge trough theirimportant task is being completed: the creation of a description, which is easy understandable inside oflibrary of model fragments exploring relevant community.concepts about sustainability, selected among Page 13qualitative models produced in the case studies,complemented with interesting additional models. Page 5 European Living Labs Sarka Horakova, Petr Horak (Wirelessinfo)Evaluation of the Riacho Fundo Qualitative Model Information technologies are in a process of the rapid development. In the whole Europe werePaulo Salles, Gisele Morison Feltrini, Ana Luiza established centres with the ability to provideRios Caldas and Monica Resende (University of alternative solution of mobile applications andBrasilia, Brazil) technologies more quickly and effectively. These The Riacho Fundo qualitative model, a product centres were the base stones for unites called Livingof the Brazilian case study run by the Univeristy of Labs (LL).Brasilia in Naturnet project, was evaluated by Page 24stakeholders. The Riacho Fundo basin is locatednear Brasilia, the new capital, and changes in land Events of interestuse are held responsible for major changes in the Page 24area, including deforestation, erosion, loss ofbiodiversity and water resources, and decrease ineconomic productivity. Contact Page 9 Page 25 České centrum pro vědu a společnost, Radlická 28/263, 150 00 Praha 5, Czech Republic ISSN 1801-6480 <META NAME="DC.Identifier" CONTENT="(SCHEME=ISSN) 18016480">
  2. 2. Final NNR Garp3 Modelling and Simulation Workbench Release Jochem Liem, Floris Linnebank, Anders Bouwer and Bert Bredeweg (University of Amsterdam,September 2007) In the simulation results, remarks made by modellers The university of Amsterdam has released a on model ingredients are all gathered and shown innew version of the free Garp3 workbench for tooltips. This was a non-trivial task, since thequalitative modelling and simulation in the final month simulation engine uses a pure Prolog program codeof the project. This will be the final release of Garp3 representation compared to the object-orientedin the context of the NaturNet-Redime project. The model building environment. The end result is thatusability and functionality of Garp3 has come a long tooltips in the simulation results now integrateway since the start of the project. Initially, three remarks originating from model ingredient definitions,separate applications were needed to build ingredients in scenarios, and ingredients in multiplequalitative models (Homer), to simulate them (Garp), model fragments, and specify where they came from.and to visualise their results (VisiGarp). These As a result modellers can now store theirprograms differed in terms of interfaces, and look and considerations for creating an ingredient, wheneverfeel. Within the NaturNet-Redime project, these tools they create a model ingredient. When working with ahave been integrated into a unified workbench for model these considerations are shown as tooltipmodel building, simulation and simulation when hovering the ingredient icons with the mouse.visualisation [1]. Furthermore, new functionality has This makes the simulation results morebeen added to open multiple models, reuse parts of understandable to stakeholders.models (using copy/paste), share, search for, anddownload models via the web (using the Web To support modellers who are not yet fullyOntology Language import/export functionality and a proficient with the use of Garp3, a contextual onlinequalitative model repository) [2]. Another major help system was developed. This system allowschange was the inclusion of the new Sketch users to directly access the documentation that isenvironment that allows modellers to formalise their relevant to their current task. Part of this system is ainitial ideas about system’s behaviour and refine set of 351 web-pages on the Qualitative Reasoningthese ideas into a representation that is close to the and Modelling Portal ( thatactual qualitative model representation [2]. replaces the two old user manuals [4,5]. These new web-pages are not just plain copies of the parts of the During the last half-year the software user manual, but a complete reworking in a moredevelopment focussed on making the Garp3 informative and understandable format. Each ofworkbench accessible to an even greater audience these pages describes the current window, the tasks[3]. The first significant addition is multiple language that can be performed, and the available (see Figure 1). In the latest version of Garp3, Furthermore, each page links to pages describing themodellers can translate their models into any of the menu options, additional features, related tasks, usedISO 639-2 languages. This makes it possible for icons, and used definitions (in a glossary). Finally,modellers and stakeholders to develop and interact each page links to a page describing each of thewith models in their own native language. If desired, icons used in the window. To access these helpthe terms used in the model can be stored in all the pages, each window in the Garp3 workbench nowavailable languages. As a side effect of adding the has an owl help-icon in the upper-right corner.multiple language support the existing copy/paste Clicking on this icon opens the documentationfunctionality and the OWL import and export webpage describing that particular window, removingfunctionality had to be improved to also deal with the need to browse through thick user manuals.model translations. Garp3 has had tooltip support from its initialrelease. However, in the latest version of thesoftware this functionality was significantly improved. 2
  3. 3. determines the probability that this fault may actually To support modellers in improving their occur during simulation. Selecting one of the possiblesimulation results a tracer was added (see Figure 2). issues explains what the issue is, and directs theThis tracer shows the inferences made by the engine modeller to a Frequently Asked Questions entry onduring the simulation of a model. This functionality the QRM Portal that explains the issue and how itaims to explain why a model exhibits certain can be fixed. The goal of the trouble-shooter is tobehaviour to the modeller in an understandable way. detect the most frequently occurring problemsThe goal is to make it easier for modellers to change modellers face without having to use the tracer, andtheir model to generate the expected behaviour. By to suggest changes to the model that may resolvedefault, the tracer shows a general overview of the these issues. Notice that, during this last half year ofreasoning done by the simulation engine. This view is the NaturNet-Redime project a significant number ofmeant to detect main issues and problems (if new frequently asked questions entries were addedpresent) in the reasoning. The interface makes it to the FAQ page help modellers resolve theirpossible to manipulate the tracer to show the specific modelling issues [6].type of reasoning in which such an issue occurs. Thisinformation helps the modeller adapt the model to Finally, there were improvements to theresolve undesired issues. Sketch environment, significant improvements to the reasoning engine as such, the simulation preferences In order to detect potential faults in models, a and the multiple model support [6]. In the simulationproof of concept of a trouble-shooter was added to environment a new visualisation of the state graphGarp3. The trouble-shooter is the first step towards was added: the table view (see Figure 3). Thisan automated debugging facility in Garp3, and is visualisation makes it easier to deal with simulationsintegrated with the model-building environment of that generate a lot of states. The latest version ofGarp3. This trouble-shooter detects possible faults in Garp3 is available on based on a set of diagnostic rules, and Figure 1: The multiple language support allows the translation of model ingredients into different languages. 3
  4. 4. Figure 2: The Tracer shows a general overview of the reasoning during the simulation.Figure 3: The Table view in the simulation environment makes it easier to analyse large simulations. 4
  5. 5. 4. Bouwer, A., Liem, J., and Bredeweg, B. References 2005. User Manual for Single-User Version 1. Bredeweg, B., Bouwer, A., and Liem, J. of QR Workbench, Naturnet-Redime, STREP 2006. Single-user QR model building and project co-funded by the European simulation workbench, Naturnet-Redime, Commission within the Sixth Framework STREP project co-funded by the European Programme (2002-2006), Project no. Commission within the Sixth Framework 004074, Project Deliverable Report D4.2.1. Programme (2002-2006), Project no. 5. Bakker, E., Bouwer, A., Liem, J. and 004074, Project Deliverable Report D4.1. Bredeweg, B. 2006. User Manual for 2. Liem, J., Bouwer, A. and Bredeweg, B. 2006. Collaborative QR model building and Collaborative QR model building and simulation workbench, Naturnet-Redime, simulation workbench, Naturnet-Redime, STREP project co-funded by the European STREP project co-funded by the European Commission within the Sixth Framework Commission within the Sixth Framework Programme (2002-2006), Project no. Programme (2002-2006), Project no. 004074, Project Deliverable Report D4.2.2. 004074, Project Deliverable Report D4.3. 6. Bouwer, A., Liem, J., Linnebank, F., and 3. Liem, J., A. Bouwer, F. Linnebank, and B. Bredeweg, B. 2007. Analysis of Frequently Bredeweg, 2007. Intelligent Help System, Asked Questions and Improvements to the Naturnet-Redime, STREP project co-funded Garp3 Workbench, Naturnet-Redime, by the European Commission within the Sixth STREP project co-funded by the European Framework Programme (2002-2006), Project Commission within the Sixth Framework no. 004074, Project Deliverable Report D4.4. Programme (2002-2006), Project no. 004074, Project Deliverable Milestone D4.2.3. Integrating Case Studies in a Large Qualitative Model on Sustainability Paulo Salles (University of Brasilia) and Bert Bredeweg (University of Amsterdam) that had been changed by human actions and are As the NaturNet-Redime project reaches the now being someway and somewhat recovered. Twoend and its five case studies are finished, an case studies, the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserveimportant task is being completed: the creation of a (Romania) and River Mesta (Bulgaria), addressedlibrary of model fragments exploring relevant basins that were modified in the past but now areconcepts about sustainability, selected among areas under protection. Accordingly, the topicsqualitative models produced in the case studies, addressed in the models produced explore naturalcomplemented with interesting additional models. aspects of these ecosystems. The Riacho FundoThis article summarizes the work done for building basin (Brazil) was designed to show thethe library and show how this task will benefit transformation of a natural ecosystem into rural andstakeholders willing to have a better understanding of then to urbanized areas. The last two case studies,sustainability. River Kamp (Austria) and River Trent and River Great Ouse (England) explore sustainability issues in water basins that have been transformed in many The models produced in the project were aspects and are now under human management.designed to represent sustainability in water basins 5
  6. 6. the library. For example, the user can assume that The problem addressed by the NaturNet- certain quantities are stable and parts of the systemRedime team is how to organize a large library of are in equilibrium for building a particular model andmodel fragments based on the case study models. running certain simulations within the library.Such models address specific problems and it isnecessary to organize the simulations in a way that The Riacho Fundo case study was a testbedstakeholders could access to multiple, alternative for combining different models and implementing amodels that differ along a variety of dimensions. The common library of model fragments (Salles et al.,final numbers are quite impressive: 112 entities 2007). For this case study, three basic perspectivesinvolving 201 quantities, organized in 414 model were defined: Rural, Semi-urban and Urban. Thefragments integrated into a unique qualitative model, Rural perspective focus on human activities aiming atfrom which it is possible to run 202 different exploring natural resources for agricultural purposes.simulations. The Semi-urban perspective explores the changes in land use that transform natural and agricultural areas Literature on Qualitative Reasoning report the into urban areas. The Urban perspective addressesuse of perspectives, implemented by means of the city and its physical infrastructure, its dependencemodelling assumptions as a possible solution for this on resources coming from outside and its owntype of problem. Perspectives provide different views metabolism. These perspectives combine economicof the same knowledge domain encoded in the library and social aspects is related to economy,(in our case, sustainable development). When the governance, culture and human well being. Theseuser assumes a certain perspective (s)he provides three perspectives are not the only possibilities. Inthe context for exploring different parts of the library, fact, it is possible to have elements from all of themselecting knowledge to be included in models and combined in a single simulation model, and to createrunning of simulations. Implementing the new perspectives when representing specificperspectives in a large library can be done by using situations.modelling assumptions. Assumptions restrict theselection of model fragments and keep the The table below presents the main conceptssimulations within clearly defined limits. If the addressed, organized in three perspectives, in theassumptions are made clear, the user can create a Riacho Fundo case study models:context to assess the simulation models provided by Perspectives Land use Urban Semi-urban Rural Main problems Drainage system; flooded Urbanization; water Erosion; loss of water areas; transported garbage infiltration; and soil erosion resources and biodiversity and damage caused by floods Economic features Services: garages Industry: textile and food Agriculture: cattle; crops industries Soil Impermeable soil Soil particle aggregation Soil fertility Water resources Effects of uncontrolled flow Effects of erosion and Effects of erosion and of water run off and of the underground water on underground water on springs drainage system springs and rivers and streams Biological entities Mosquitos, Pathogens Vegetation Vegetation; Vertebrates; Capybara Human Economic activities; Economic activities Economic activities Human well-being: garbage and water related diseases Agents Rainfall Urbanization -- Sustainability Control of diseases; Water quality; Soil fertilization; Control of residues Control of residues Reuse of residues Table 1. Overview of the main concepts addressed by the Riacho Fundo model. 6
  7. 7. (f) the consequences of deforestation on biodiversity,Integrating the other models new food and medicine production, erosion, uses of The urban, semi-urban and urban Riacho water, agricultural production and the GDP;Fundo case study models were combined with other (g) the effects of petroleum market oscillations onmodels and the Library eventually included model energy availability for industries, transportation andfragments with topics related to human uses; the use of solid fuels as an alternative(a) food web, nutrient cycling, heavy metal pollution for petroleum gas in domestic activities; asand human health in the Danube River Delta consequences, the model explores different types of(Romania); respiratory diseases and of global warming as consequences of petroleum consumption.(b) the effects of pollution, erosion and physicalfactors (aeration and diffusion) and biological factors Of course, the three perspectives used in the(photosynthesis and respiration) on dissolved oxygen Riacho Fundo were not enough to capture all theconcentration in waters of the River Mesta (Bulgaria); possibilities in the library. We decided to classify two groups of perspectives: (a) case study-based(c) Stakeholder participation, along with scientists, perspectives; and (b) thematic perspectives. Theplanners and groups of interest in the ellaboration of former group included seven perspectives that bettersustainability plans. The effects of these plans and of described the case study as they were presented; thesustainable actions on ecological integrity and human 14 thematic perspectives explore combinations ofwell being in River Kamp (Austria); simulations that address similar or related concepts(d) Water abstraction from a river in order to generate in different case study, that was commercialized in River Kampbasin (Austria); The final result can be summarized in the(e) the effects of different environmental factors on following table:salmon life cycle and the rehabilitation of fishery inRiver Trent and River Great Ouse (England); Types of perspective Perspectives Case study-based Natural ; Rural ; Semi-urban ; Urban ; Natural resources exploitation ; Natural environment rehabilitation ; Social Thematic based (I) Natural systems; (II) Natural disasters; (III) Human explores natural resources; (IV) Environmental effects of human activities (in interaction with natural factors); (V) Energy; (VI) Economy; (VII) Education and trainning; (VIII) Science and Technology; (IX) Legislation; (X) Stakeholder participation; (XI) Governmental plans and activities; (XII) Management actions for sustainability; (XIII) Human health; (XIV) Human well being The interested reader can find details of these Conceptually, modelling assumptions fall into21 perspectives and the simulations included in each two categories: simplifying and operatinggroup in the Deliverable D6.7.1 (Salles and assumptions. Simplifying assumptions are used toBredeweg, 2007), available in the NaturNet – Redime make explicit how knowledge details such as theportal ( underlying perspective, approximations, and level of granularity are represented in the model fragments. Simplifying assumptions are classified as (a) Technically speaking, perspectives can be ontological assumptions, to provide the vocabularyimplemented by using explicitly represented used in the model, explicating what kinds of thingsassumptions and other modeling primitives, including exist and what sort of relationships between themhierarchies of entities and model fragments, can be held; (b) grain assumptions, to define the levelattributes, alternative quantity spaces for key of details represented in the model, perhapsquantities and alternative representations of key aggregating some features and ignoring others; (c)concepts. The consequences of adopting a given approximation assumptions, to make models that areperspective in a simulation are determined easy to use, sometimes at the cost of accuracy; and,automatically by the reasoning engine based on the often intertwined with approximation assumptions, (d)encapsulated knowledge relevant to the perspective abstraction assumptions, used to reduce the(Bredeweg et al. 2006). complexity of the modelling language, usually reducing information available and increasing ambiguity. 7
  8. 8. Operating assumptions are used to managecomplexity. In a way, they give focus to thesimulation, by implementing constraints so that themodel describes the behaviour relevant for answeringspecific questions. Three types of operating assumptions are Acknowledgementsconsidered here: (a) local restrictions: restrictions on The work described here is the result of thequantity values implemented by means of inequalities efforts done by many people: Bert Bredeweg,between quantities and constants (e.g. number_of Anders Bouwer, Ana Luiza Rios Caldas,>0); (b) operation mode: a ‘general assumption’ that Eugenia Cioaca, Silviu Covaliov, Jochem Liem, Elenacontrols a collection of local restrictions; and (c) Nakova, Michael Neumann, Richard Noble,steady-state assumptions: determine that all Andreas Zitek, Emilia Varadinova, Tim Nuttle,derivatives for some class of parameters have value Yordan Uzunov, Jelmer Jellema, Floris Linnebaken,zero. Ultimately, operating assumptions increase the Elinor Bakker. We also thank the participation ofefficiency of the simulation by ruling out entire other partners, as the group from Latvia (Maris, Unaclasses of behaviour (e.g. immigration and emigration and Peteris), for their support and fruitful commentsin population dynamics), and by indicating the range on our work. Finally, we are grateful to the financialof parameter values for which such approximations support partially provided by the Commission ofare valid (for example, birth rate can only exist when European Communities, project Naturnet – Redime,number_of >0). EU STREP, contract number 004074. Simulations generated from the library areexpected to be easy to understand and to manage,as they represent complex phenomena with differentlevels of granularity, either exposing or hiding details Referencesin different contexts and using adequate vocabulary(for example, about erosion). Alternative views of 1. Bredeweg, B.; Bouwer, A.; Jellema, J.;certain aspects (for example, soil fertility and Bertels, D.; Linnebank, F.; Liem, J. (2006)resource inflow for agriculture) should allow for better Garp3 – A new Worksbench for Qualitativeunderstanding of how different factors influence Reasoning and Modelling. In Bailey-Kellog,human actions in the basin. Finally, the use of C. and Kuipers, B. (eds.) Proceedings of theoperating assumptions implemented as 20th International Workshop on Qualitativecorrespondences and exogenous variables keep the Reasoning, pp. 21-28 (conference held insize of the simulations within manageable limits. Hanover, New Hampshire, US, 10-12 July, Garp3 (Bredeweg et al., 2006) is an interesting 2006).tool for implementing compositional models, as itprovides a unique modelling language for expressing 2. Salles, P. and Bredeweg, B. (2007)both model components and assumptions Integrated library of Qualitative Reasoningconstraining their use. Some of Garp3 modelling model fragments. Deliverable D6.7.1,primitives, such as entities and configurations, NaturNet-Redime, EU STREP, projectattributes and agents are particularly useful for number 004074.implementing perspectives. Model fragments,inequality relations, correspondences and exogenousquantities are particularly suited for implementing 3. Salles, P.; Bredeweg, B.; Caldas, A.L.R. andboth simplifying and operating assumptions. Nuttle, T. (2007). Modelling sustainability in Finally, we expect that soon the results of the the Riacho Fundo water basin (Brasília,qualitative modelling effort of NaturNet – Redime will Brazil). In Chris Price (ed.) Proceedings ofbe available not only for European and Brazilian the 21st International Workshop onstakeholders, but for users all over the world, in the Qualitative Reasoning (QR07) Aberystwyth,web sites and (Wales, U.K.), 26-28 June, 2007, pages We hope you will enjoy it! 160. 8
  9. 9. Evaluation of the Riacho Fundo Qualitative Model Paulo Salles, Gisele Morison Feltrini, Ana Luiza Rios Caldas and Monica Resende, University of Brasilia, Brazil activities. Special attention was given to the The Riacho Fundo qualitative model, a product evaluation of the causal model, and to the use ofof the Brazilian case study run by the University of qualitative models to support the development ofBrasilia in Naturnet project, was evaluated by cognitive competences and abilities.stakeholders. The Riacho Fundo basin is locatednear Brasilia, the new capital, and changes in landuse are held responsible for major changes in the The results were very positive. The expertsarea, including deforestation, erosion, loss of agreed that the concepts could be justified bybiodiversity and water resources, and decrease in scientific knowledge or educated commonsense. Theeconomic productivity. Urbanization is also a managers considered the modeling language easyproblem, as urban infra-structure, such as the and accessible to different potential water managers.engineered drainage system, is lacking. The model They also mentioned that the causal models areincludes three sets of simulations, each providing a conceptually correct and clear, and could be useful toperspective to the sustainability regarding the basin, support the generation of explanations andnamely the Urban, Semi-urban and Rural predictions about the system behaviour. Theperspectives. Each of these viewpoints, created to teachers considered the models very useful forrepresent problems identified by stakeholders in the educational purposes and accessible for secondaryregion, explore different but complementary aspects. school students. They also assessed the generationUrban areas deal with the lack of drainage system of explanations and predictions about systemand, as consequence, with flooding, mosquitoes, behaviour based on causal models alone or intransported garbage, pathogens and other aspects combination with qualitative values of relevantthat affect the human well being. Semi-urban areas variables. The teachers also recognized the potentialshow the effects of urbanization on soil particles of qualitative models for supporting the developmentaggregation and consequences of erosion and of cognitive competences and abilities . Finally, thereduction of water infiltration. The simulations explore three types of stakeholders were very positive abouthow these factors may hamper industrial production the potential use of qualitative models in general andand water production from springs and streams. in the Riacho Fundo model in particular, forRural areas are represented in the model as areas representing problems and maybe suggestingthat are being deforestated and, as a consequence, solutions for real world problems in their activities.problems of soil and nutrient loss, deposit ofsediments on water bodies, reduction on agriculturalproduction and loss of biodiversity arise. We conclude that the Riacho Fundo model was positively evaluated, that it can be used in different ways and that it has the potential to support Three groups took part in the evaluation learning about sustainability in the basin and inevents: (a) experts from the Brasilia Water and decision making about how to use natural resourcesSewage Company (CAESB); (b) water resources in a sustainable way.managers; and (c) secondary school teachers. Nineevents of dissemination and evaluation activitieswere held between July and October 2007, involving Acknowledgements: The authors thank thein total almost 100 representatives of these groups.Three types of questionnaires were prepared, teachers, experts and managers who participate ofexploring different aspects of the Riacho Fundo the evaluation activities. We are also grateful to the Centro Educacional 6, the Centro Educacional Avemodel. The experts were concerned with the Branca, the Brasilia Water and Sewage Companyconceptual validation of the model on scientific (CAESB) and the University of Brasilia for theirgrounds, inspecting the clarity and correctness of support to the activities of the NaturNet-Redimeconcepts expressed by the entities andconfigurations (the representation of the system project.structure), the quantities and the simulations. Theteachers assessed the concepts represented inmodel from the educational view point. During the Contact person - Paulo Salles: psalles@unb.broperational validation different aspects of the modelwere assessed. Both the managers and the teachersevaluated the use of the model in their dedicated 9
  10. 10. Evaluation of QR Models Related to a Sustainable Catchment Management Andreas Zitek, Stefan Schmutz and Susanne Muhar (University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria) Bert Bredeweg (University of Amsterdam) Paulo Salles (University of Brasilia) evaluation of both models focusing on Summary “validation and verification” of the models were The qualitative simulation models related to conducted separately. The participants were askedthe sustainable development of the Kamp valley to fill out questionnaires after the presentation, andexplore the following aspects (Zitek, 2006; Zitek et the collective (interactive) inspection of importantal., 2006): scenarios and model fragments with the GARP3 software. (A) Development and implementation ofsustainable actions in a river catchment The general evaluation, based on a power(stakeholder integration, quality of sustainability point presentation and a collective exploration ofplans, development of ecological integrity and parts of the model using GARP3 on personal Laphuman well being, probability of catastrophic tops, was done at the 17.10.07 from 16:15 to Eleven persons, divided into students and experts of different aquatic resource domains, participated (B) Hydropower production (water storage in the event.and release, water abstraction) and its effect onfish. The expert evaluation of Model A and B took place at the 30.10.07 between 8:30 and 12:30 each As a part of the training and evaluation lasting about 2 hours and were run as face to faceactivities described in Deliverable 7.2 (Bredeweg et discussions based on the printed causal maps andal., 2007) their reliability and potential for usage in a conjoint exploration of important model fragmentseducation and decision-making was evaluated by and simulations using GARP3 using a laptop.experts and students. Results and discussion Evaluation goals Both evaluations, the general evaluation of The evaluation of models is an important Model A “Sustainability Management” and thestep in the model building process. Generally a expert evaluations of Model A & B “Watermodel evaluation basically covers “validation and abstraction and Fish” yielded a very positiveverification” of the model as well as the feedback with regard to the QR approach, the“acceptance of the chosen approach and GARP3 software used to build models and themodel” by the addressed stakeholder groups. models themselves representing important issuesValidation proves if the scientific and conceptual related to the sustainable development of thecontents of the model are acceptable for its riverine landscape Kamp. For example, using a 5-intended use, verification proves that the model is point scale (fully disagree, largely disagree,correctly implemented by a demonstration of its somewhat agree/disagree, largely agree, fullyuse. Proving the acceptance of stakeholders agree) most people “largely or fully agreed” thattypically evaluates the potential of the model and QR models represent complex knowledge in anthe modelling approach for broader use. understandable manner and that QR and GARP3 can be seen as a valuable learning tool for understanding real world causal Evaluation methods relationships related to a sustainable To evaluate both models developed by the development of riverine landscapes. Also mostBOKU (Model A: “Sustainability Management” and people “largely or fully agreed” that the presentedModel B: “Water abstraction and Fish”) a two phase QR models might significantly contribute to theapproach was chosen. A general evaluation of understanding of students and stakeholders whichModel A mainly focusing on the “acceptance of entities and processes drive a sustainablethe chosen approach and model” by students development of a riverine landscape and thereforeand scientists of different domains and an expert enhances their capability of making decisions. 10
  11. 11. as in reality this is of high complexity, being So the general aim, to produce software also driven by the general politicaland models in QR language that allow people to structure, difficulties between differentinteract with and learn about sustainable organization units with regard to theirdevelopment is clearly supported by the competences (personal behaviour!) andevaluation results. differences in financial resources; Generally experts were a bit more additionally very often policies withconservative in agreeing with the approach than complementary aims are existing, asstudents. That could be because A) that experts are policies often lack behind the socialmore familiar with the problems of model building development. That means, a more detailedand therefore do not agree full with many aspects study and representation of the internal(they only agree "largely") or B) that students can political structures, determining thebe more influenced by the opinion of the presenter implementation process, is needed.being ‘on fire’ with QR modelling. On the other handfew students gave sometimes answers like “I fullydisagree or largely disagree”, which did not occur Parts of the Model B that were mostthat often with the persons considering themselves interesting for the evaluators were:experts. This means in our opinion, that thesestudents probably have not yet understood the • That it is easy to change the content of apotential of the approach or they simply made a scenario by using and exchanging differentmistake when answering the questions (maybe they assumptions that simply allows modellingmisinterpreted the rating scheme). the effects of the same human pressure on different guilds of fish (positive and negative effects of flow velocity and water temperature on different guilds). Parts of the Model A, that were mostinteresting for the evaluators were: • To see the causal interrelatedness of the Parts of the Model B that should be involved entities of the Kamp management enhanced in the eyes of the evaluators were: system and especially that private interest might negatively influence the sustainability • A more realistic representation of the process and that the combined influence of natural variability of the river discharge planners, science and local population (probably by using the random function in (stakeholders) defines the quality of the scenario editor) and the amount of sustainability plans and the whole abstracted water related to mean annual sustainability process. This understanding flow as this defines the frequency of water opens the possibility of different potential overflow events at weirs that are suspected intervention options to reach the goal of a to have a significant effect on fish. sustainable development. • A more realistic representation of the • To see that ecological integrity and human influence of the length of the water well being are represented in the abstraction stretch on the temperature sustainability model. development within the river (at the moment the river stretch is treated as a • Specific scenarios showing the catastrophic "container" with the same abiotic factors event as trigger for government action for everywhere) and sustainable development. • an integration of the effect of morphology • The idea that money spent for measures on fish and on water temperature. can only be treated as money spent for a community driven development, if the community is involved in the process of Important additional statements related to developing and implementing measures the QR approach, the software and the models (otherwise the money spent is not a were also collected. Most interesting for the community driven investment!). attendees was to see the interrelatedness of the system presented and the use of qualitative “stock- flow” dynamics known from the System Dynamics Parts of the Model A, that should be approach. Only some added that they sometimesenhanced in the eyes of the evaluators were: got a bit lost when confronted with the total view of the causal model describing a sustainable • Private interests should be better development of the Kamp valley. It was also stated represented, as a basis to minimize them that when showing these models to other user and achieve sustainable development groups, their general ability to deal with complexity • The government action for sustainable should be accounted for; meaning that for each development should be better described, user group the way of presenting the model should 11
  12. 12. be adopted. Probably sometimes these models a prerequisite for the target, to motivatemight be too complicated for certain stakeholder stakeholders and students to use thegroups (people need to have some education e.g. software and put their conceptualto deal with complexity and causal relationships – knowledge in causal understand I’s and P’s for example, in amodelling approach like this). A high potential of an • To further enhance the modelling processapplication of QR models in various fields, mainly in itself it could be helpful to always see theeducation but also in decision making and research consequences of the modelling actions andwas suggested by many participants. The potential newly implemented model fragmentsof the GARP3 software and the QR approach to (configurations, proportionalities andsustain collective, interactive social learning was influences) on the fly.clearly pointed out. Particularly, the identification of • It also could be helpful to have the fulldependencies and causal relationships was seen model shown in a window like the "showas a prerequisite for understanding a system and entities & configurations" window with thetherefore also for learning and decision making. opportunity to select parts of the model byWith regard to a broader use of QR models in hand to be run in a simulation (running onlysociety especially for decision making it was stated, parts of the model by simply selecting partsthat it might take some time and engagement to of the model by drawing a window).establish approaches like that in society.(University) education using and teaching such • To link the outcomes of causal models to aapproaches can be seen as an important basis for GIS (Geographic Information System)a further application. would open a whole new field of promising applications. With regard to the presented simulationscenarios some further interesting statementswere collected. For example, that some behaviors Referencesof simulations might not be true in real worldsystems (e.g. that they stay within an interval for a 1. Bredeweg, B., P. Salles, D. Bertels, J.certain time steps before they change; this should Rafalowicz, A. Bouwer, J. Liem, G. avoided, when not explicitly defined as model Feltrini, A. L. Rios Caldas, M. M. Pereiratarget). Resende, A. Zitek and T. Nuttle (2007). Training Report on using QR for learning That means on the one hand that the about Sustainable Development.simulation behaviors of final models to be Deliverable D7.2 of the NaturNet-presented should be restricted as much as needed REDIME project. avoid outcomes that are not intended (althoughone also might also significantly learn from 2. Zitek, A. (2006). Textual description ofunwanted outcomes of a simulation) and on the the river Kamp case study focusing onother hand that there are still QR domain specific basic ecological and socio-economicingredients, semantics and behaviors (e.g. the features for an integrative andquantity spaces as points and intervals), that might sustainable development of the riverineconflict with the intuitive way of stakeholders to landscape. Deliverable D6.6.1 of theexpress things. Therefore, it is suggested, that the NaturNet-REDIME project. Vienna,end user should A) only be confronted with Institute of Hydrobiology and Aquaticsimulations & scenarios that exactly show the Ecosystem Management, BOKU. D6.5.1.intended behaviour and B) be as less as possible 3. Zitek, A., S. Muhar, S. Preis, S. Schmutz,confronted with QR domain specific features not to B. Bredeweg and P. Salles (2006). QRirritate an intuitive modelling building practice by models and documentation for learningdomain specific restrictions. about sustainable development, focusing on basic ecological and socio-economic features for an integrative and Finally, there were also some suggestions sustainable development of the riverinespecific to the development of the GARP3 landscape of the Kamp Deliverable D6.6.2 of the NaturNet- • With regard to the software packages REDIME project. Vienna, Institute of available for building QR models prior to Hydrobiology and Aquatic Ecosystem the project, GARP3 can now be used very Management, BOKU. D6.6.2. intuitively to build QR models representing 12
  13. 13. Uniform Resource Management as Tool for Content Awareness of Information and Knowledge Inside Communities Karel Charvat, Stepan Kafka, Marek Splichal Uniform Resource Management (URM) point of view of context, the information or knowledgeprovides a framework in which communities can could be divided into different parties:share information and knowledge trough theirdescription, which is easy understandable inside of • Information or knowledge provider In order to share information and a party supplying the resource;knowledge, there has to be scheme, which will • Custodian, accepts accountability andsupport uniform description of information and responsibility for the resources andknowledge including common scheme and ensures appropriate care andvocabularies. A schema defines the meaning, maintenance of the resource;characteristics, and relationships of a set ofproperties, and this may include constraints on • Owner of the resource;potential values and the inheritance of properties • User, who uses the resource;from other schemas. The schema specificationlanguage is a declarative representation language • Distributor who distributes theinfluenced by ideas from knowledge representation resource;(e.g. semantic nets, frames, predicate logic) as well • Originator who created the resource;as database schema specification languages andgraph data models. • Point of Contact to be contacted for acquiring knowledge about or Objectives acquisition of the resource; The main objective of URM will be easydescription, discovery and validation of relevant • Principal investigator responsible forinformation sources. URM will ensure that any user gathering information and conductingcan easily discover, evaluate and use relevant research;information. The free text engine (eg. Google) can’t • Processor who has processed the databe used due to the fact in many cases user obtains in a manner such that the resourcethousands of irrelevant links. This happens because has been modified;the free text engines don’t fully recognise the contextof researched information. The context characterise • Publisher, i.e. party who published theany information, knowledge and observation. Context resource;strongly influences the way how the information will • Author, i.e. party who authored thebe used. There are existing different definitions of resource.context. The important issues for the context are: • to identity of an entity; Any information could be characterised by • to profile of an entity; identification of information which uniquely identify the resource such as: • spatial information • Title, abstract, reference dates, • temporal information version, purpose, responsible parties • environmental information • Data extent, • social relation • Browse graphics (overview, thumbnail, • resources that are nearby etc.), • availability of resources; • Possible usage; Many context attributes characterize the • Legal and security constraints;environmental information or knowledge. From the 13
  14. 14. standardized descriptive metadata with networked • Content Description, i.e. information objects has the potential for substantially improving identifying the feature catalogue(s) resource discovery capabilities by enabling field- used and/or information about the based searches, permitting indexing of non-textual coverage content; objects, and allowing access to the surrogate content • Spatial Representation, i.e. information that is distinct from access to the content of the concerning the mechanisms used to resource itself." represent spatially the resource data; • Quality and validity information, i.e. a Technology Description general assessment of the quality of the resource data including: The basic components, of URM could be divided into followings topics: • Quality measures related to the geometric, temporal and semantic • Metadata scheme, which define structure, accuracy, the completeness or the which could be used for description of logical consistency of the data; information • Lineage information including the • Thesaurus - These are well known examples description of the sources and of hierarchical systems for representing processes applied to the sources; subject taxonomies in terms of the relationships between named concepts. • Validity information • Geospatial thesaurus - Geospatial thesaurus supported search about geospatial object (for Methodology example gazetteers, GeoParcers, The possibility, how to solve the problem with Geocoders)context is to use metadata for standardised • Catalogue service. Service that providesdescription of any information, knowledge, data discovery and management services on asources, sensors, etc. In the combination with store of metadata about instances. Thestandardised lists of terms (controlled vocabularies or metadata may be for dataset instances, e.g.,thesaurus, standardised way of geometric location, dataset catalogue, or may contain servicegazetteers and controlled list of categories), it will metadata, e.g., service catalogue. ISO 19115increase efficiency of discovery of requested is relevant to catalogue service for datasetknowledge, information or data sources. metadata. Metadata is descriptive information about anobject or a resource whether it is physical orelectronic. While metadata itself is relatively new, the Metadata profileunderlying concepts behind metadata have been For the purpose of NaturNet Redime and c@rused for as long as collections of information have project, the following profiles are used:been organized. Library card catalogues represent awell-established type of metadata that has served as • Dublin Corecollection management and resource discovery tools • ISO19115for decades. Metadata can be generated either "byhand" or derived automatically using software. • ISO19119Metadata, then, can be thought of as data about • ISO19139other data. It is the Internet-age term for informationthat librarians traditionally have put into catalogues, Dublin Core - ISO 15836and it most commonly refers to descriptiveinformation about Web resources. A metadata record The Dublin Core metadata element set is a standard for cross-domain information resourceconsists of a set of attributes, or elements, necessaryto describe the resource in question. Although the description. It provides a simple and standardised setconcept of metadata predates the Internet and the of conventions for describing things online in waysWeb, worldwide interest in metadata standards and that make them easier to find. Dublin Core is widelypractices has exploded with the increase in electronic used to describe digital materials such as video, sound, image, text, and composite media like webpublishing and digital content, but now also in relation pages. Implementations of Dublin Core typicallywith information resources like sensors, and theconcomitant "information overload" resulting from make use of XML and are Resource Descriptionvast quantities of undifferentiated digital data Framework based. Dublin Core is defined by NISOavailable online. The need to overcome problem of Standard Z39.85-2007. It could be used foroverloading of data has to be solved on the base description of any non spatial information. 14
  15. 15. ISO19115:2003 The Dublin Core standard includes two levels:Simple and Qualified. Simple Dublin Core comprises ISO 19115:2003 defines the schema requiredfifteen elements; The Simple Dublin Core Metadata for describing geographic information and services. ItElement Set (DCMES) consists of 15 metadata provides information about the identification, theelements: extent, the quality, the spatial and temporal schema, spatial reference, and distribution of digital • Title geographic data. • Creator ISO 19115:2003 is applicable to: • Subject • the cataloguing of datasets, clearinghouse • Description activities, and the full description of datasets; • Publisher • geographic datasets, dataset series, and individual geographic features and feature • Contributor properties. • Date ISO 19115:2003 defines: • Type • mandatory and conditional metadata sections, metadata entities, and metadata • Format elements; • Identifier • the minimum set of metadata required to • Source serve the full range of metadata applications (data discovery, determining data fitness for • Language use, data access, data transfer, and use of • Relation digital data); • Coverage • optional metadata elements - to allow for a more extensive standard description of • Rights geographic data, if required; DCMI also maintains a small, general • a method for extending metadata to fitvocabulary recommended for use within the element specialized needs.Type. This vocabulary currently consists of 12 terms: Though ISO 19115:2003 is applicable to digital • Collection data, its principles can be extended to many other • Dataset forms of geographic data such as maps, charts, and textual documents as well as non-geographic data. • Event ISO19119 • Image ISO 19119 provides a framework for • InteractiveResource developers to create software that enables users to access and process geographic data from a variety of • MovingImage sources across a generic computinginterface within • PhysicalObject an open information technology environment. • Service The geographic services architecture specified in ISO 19119 has been developed to meet the • Software following purposes: • Sound • Provide an abstract framework to allow • StillImage coordinated development of specific services, • Text • Enable interoperable services through interface standardization, The Dublin Core concepts and semantics are • Support development of a service cataloguedesigned to be syntax independent, are equally through the definition of service metadata,applicable in a variety of contexts, as long as themetadata is in a form suitable for interpretation both • Allow separation of data instances & serviceby machines and by human beings. instances, 15
  16. 16. From our point of view, this last element is a • Enable use of one providers service on key factor in the new generation of digital another providers data, and thesauruses. The use of conceptual and linguistic • Define an abstract framework which can be information stored in other types of artefacts (e.g., in implemented in multiple ways. an ontology) enables advantage to be taken of the thesaurus structural elements and makes enables the ISO19119 friendly nature of these tools to be increased for non- ISO 19119 was developed by first considering specialist, end-users.the functionality provided by “monolithic” image AGROVOC Thesaurusprocessing and GIS packages. The ISO 19119architecture provides those samefunctionalities and The AGROVOC Thesaurus has beenmore in a distributed environment, e.g., the Internet. developed by FAO and the Commission of the European Communities in the early 1980s and is ISO19139 used by AGRIS and CARIS information systems of ISO 19139 defines a spatial metadata XML FAO for indexing (associating the descriptorsschema (smXML) for the carrying out ISO appropriate to the content of the documents referred)19115/19119 Standard to facilitates standardisation and retrieval since 1986.of implementation and interoperability by providing a • It is a multilingual structured andcommon specification for describing, validating and controlled vocabulary designed toexchanging metadata cover the terminology of all subject Thesaurus fields of agriculture, forestry, fisheries, food and related domains (e.g. The technological repercussions of the digital environment) in order to describe theenvironment has affected artefacts, tools and user documents in a controlled systembehaviours alike in relation to information language.representation and retrieval. This effect opens upnew possibilities in terms of design and elaboration, • The last edition of AGROVOC (Thirdmanagement and use of tools used for information Edition, Version 1997) contains overrepresentation and retrieval. The digital environments 46000 terms (key words), of whichto thesauruses, and these can be summarised in the 16105 base descriptors (English),following elements: 9480 English synonyms, 8693 French synonyms and 12086 Spanish The first element to be considered is the synonyms. Supplements toenriching of the thesaurus structure functionality AGROVOC are produced yearly.based on hypertexting. This leads to the establishingof hyperlinks among all the structural elements • Different hierarchical and associative(descriptors, no descriptors, scope notes, etc.), and relations (broader/narrower terms,also among the different parts of the thesaurus. related terms, equivalent terms, combination use) are established The second element is the reduction of between the terms of AGROVOC.updating and maintenance costs. Due to the growingdigitalisation of thesaurus-construction processes Geospatial Thesaurusesand the gradual abandoning of paper formats in Gazetteer Servicepublishing these tools, cost-reduction is perfectlyviable. A Gazetteer Service is here defined as a network-accessible service that retrieves one or more The third element is user-integration into the features (after the ISO feature model), given a queryprocess of creating, managing and optimising (filter) request. This filter request must supportthesauruses, through usability tests, the use of user- selection by well-known feature attribute values, andmodelling techniques, etc. This makes it possible to especially by published or context-unique identifiers.create tools that take user requirements into account The query able feature attributes are any propertiesand rules out their creation as simple theoretical that describe the features, including but not limited tostructures. feature type, feature name, authority, or identification The fourth element is the possibility of applying code. Each instance of a Gazetteer Service has anmethods of reuse and interoperability at the time of associated vocabulary of identifiers. Thus, aplanning and creating the thesauruses. This makes it Gazetteer Service may apply to a given region, suchpossible to use and make the most of the conceptual as a country, or some other specialized grouping ofand linguistic information already generated for other features. The returned features will include one orartefacts. more geometries expressed in an OGC Spatial Reference System. 16
  17. 17. Geocoder CSW2.0 A Geocoder Service is a network-accessible OGCs catalogue revision working group (CS-service that transforms a description of a feature RWG) has revised and integrated the currentlocation, such as a place name, street address or catalogue implementation specifications that havepostal code, into a normalized description of the resulted in CSW 2.0. One part of this OGClocation, which includes a coordinate geometry. In specification comprises the definition of applicationother words, the Geocoder Service receives the profiles according to ISO 19106 (Geographicdescription of a feature location as input and provides information – Profiles). The overall goal of thesea normalized address with geometry as output. The profiles is to improve interoperability betweenfeature location descriptions are any words, codes or systems conforming to a specific profile. Experienceterms that describe the features, and that are well- has shown that the need for application profilesknown to the Geocoder Service, such as street results from the fact that in practice, there is no singleaddressing or postal coding scheme. This service will solution for catalogue services that fits every user’sdetermine the geometries for one or more features, needs. As stated in CSW 2.0, a base profile thatgiven their associated well-known feature location provides a basic set of information objects has to bedescriptions, which are specified to the service at supported by each catalogue instance; in addition,run-time, through a query. application profiles for different information communities should be specified. Geoparser A Geoparser Service is a network-accessibleservice that focuses on the geoparsing and marking Developmentsof free text messages using a vocabulary, such as Metadata and catalogue for URMplace names for Canada, which is possibly specifiedby the user. Output from a Geoparser Service is a Core element of implementation of URM iscollection of features that identifies words and Metadata Catalogue service Micka. Micka is spatialphrases in the original text resource. The returned metadata catalogue, which supported standards:collection of features is suitable for subsequentprocessing, such as user-controlled geocoding. It is • Any XML based standard may beanticipated that this Geoparser Service will have a stored in the system. There is specialsignificant impact on the ability of applications to module for standard tree maintenance.share multiple distributed interoperable Geoparser • In current version these standards areServices and offer a useful service to the geospatial supported:community. • Spatial data metadata (ISO 19115) - Catalogue full standard Catalogue services are the key technology for • Service metadata (ISO 19119) -locating, managing and maintaining distributed reasonable coreresources. With catalogue services, clientapplications are capable of searching for resources in • Feature catalogue (ISO 19110) -a standardised way (i.e. through standardised reasonable coreinterfaces and operations) and, ideally, they re based • Dublin Core Metadata (ISO 15836)on a well-known information model, which includesspatial references and further descriptive (thematic) • There are some predefined profiles ininformation that enables client applications to search the system:for geo-resources in very efficient ways. Whereasinterfaces and operations of catalogue services are • ISO 19115 mandatory elementswell defined, it is left up to the developer of the • ISO 19115 core elementssystem to define a specific information model which acatalogue service instance provides. This includes, • INSPIREbut is not limited to, supported query languages, • MICKA (INSPIRE elements with addedavailable search terms, response/result sets, etc. ones for common use.)This point is of major importance with respect tointeroperability between different catalogue service • ISO/DC (ISO 19115 elements coveringinstances. the DC core profile) • Full ISO19115 standard 17
  18. 18. language clicking corresponding flag on the top bar of User interface is multilingual. English, Czech, the program. The Micka use AgroVoc thesaurus andGerman, French, and partially Polish are currently supported WFS gazetteers.supported. (New language may be added by fillingthe corresponding database table.) User may switch Metadata system Micka (WEB 2) and support on one side easy management URM implementation of information inside of portal and on other side easy The first existing implementation of URM are context awareness knowledge discovery using newNaturNet-Redime Portal for awareness, training, concept of Uniform Resource Management (URM).presentation and sharing of knowledge and tools This URM concept is one from research resultsabout European sustainability which is built as an introduced by NaturNet Redime project and todayinteroperable network, with effective exchange of deeply elaborated by c@r and support sharing ofinformation, knowledge, services. Other existing knowledge inside of community using metadata andimplementation is Czech version of c-rural portal for catalogue standards for their description andsharing information inside of Czech Living labs. Both discovery.portals are implemented using AJAX technology 18
  19. 19. URM metadata search URM application selection Results • Discovery of heterogeneous knowledge in distributed environment NaturNet Redime and Czech c-rural portals using URM conceptcurrently support • Management of knowledge related to sustainable development 19
  20. 20. Authorisation is realised using authorisation Portals could be used by: system, which support sharing of authorisation • registered users with access to information trough all application on portal. After login knowledge management and into the system knowledge discovery Is on portal open list of all available tools and • non registered user could only for every tool is also available short description. After discover and access information in selection of concrete tools, this tool is open in new heterogeneous environment window. Using URM tools are published any outputs into portal metadataThe user is automatically logged with his user name system.into this application. Every from implanted applicationsupported automatically storing of metadata, when 20
  21. 21. Direct metadata uploading The knowledge discovery could be provided on • Category – there is discovered onlythe base of context awareness methods and selected category trough all contactedknowledge is possible discover not only on the URM cataloguesserver, but on all registered servers, which belongs tocertain communities. Discovery of knowledge couldbe provided or using simple search or using methods and return short info about discovered knowledgeof extended search. The simple search is defined by (abstract and information about online accessibility).to attributes: The some could be done for other categories, for example application, which could discover application • Term – this term is used for full text descried on other servers. Also for remote servers search in or connected catalogues are possible see full metadata profile and after also this application could run: 21
  22. 22. Work with external applicationsExtended search supported discovery knowledge onthe base of more parameters Extended URM search 22