Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
  • Like
Mobile Decision Support in Emergency Situations, Ketil Stølen, Sintef IKT
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.


Now you can save presentations on your phone or tablet

Available for both IPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Mobile Decision Support in Emergency Situations, Ketil Stølen, Sintef IKT


VERDIKT conference

VERDIKT conference

Published in Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    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

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide


  • 1. VERDIKT conference 15‐16.10 2013 Mobile Decision Support in Emergency  Situations Ketil Stølen Technology for a better society 1
  • 2. Issues to be addressed • • • • • • • Main hypothesis and objective Partners Two focus areas Systematic literature review Support for dynamic risk analysis in emergency situations Follow‐up of project results Conclusions Technology for a better society 2
  • 3. Hypothesis and objective • Main Hypothesis:  Careful integration of state of the art technologies and principles  for risk modeling, user interface design and hand held tools will significantly improve  the decision making process of emergency situation operational leaders. • Main Objective:  Investigate this hypothesis through the development of mobile  decision support solutions for emergency situations based on pre‐emergency  knowledge resulting from risk analysis. Technology for a better society 3
  • 4. Partners • Lead and contractual partner: Locus AS • End‐user representatives – Norwegian Red Cross  – The Directorate for Civil Protection and Emergency Planning (DSB)  – The Police • Leading suppliers on technologies, tools and solutions of relevance  • Geodata AS  • Locus AS • Research‐performing partner – SINTEF ICT Technology for a better society 4
  • 5. Focus area I: • Establish critical information and scenario‐based decision support prior to the  emergency situation • what type of information? • which risks? Technology for a better society 5
  • 6. Focus area II: • Develop solutions for efficient on‐site access to information and decision support Technology for a better society 6
  • 7. Characteristics of emergency operations • • • • Need for fast and reliable action Information from multiple sources Multiple agents Uncertainty Technology for a better society 7
  • 8. Example: Explosion at a chemical plant • • Risk of further damage? Population registry – Densely populated?  – Evacuation?  • Meteorological data, such as wind  direction and speed – Toxic chemicals? • • • • • Public transport Railway/subway tunnels nearby? Local authorities Where are the sewers?  Leakage into the water supply? Technology for a better society 8
  • 9. Example: Avalanche • Limited time – 18 minutes is the limit • • Many uncertainties Risk analysis – Safe for rescue personnel? – New avalanche? • Multiple roles – Police (overall responsibility) – Operational leader in the field – Local command  Technology for a better society 9
  • 10. Systematic literature review • Investigations of large potential and actual incidents in Norway  – between 1999 and 2008.  • The purpose was to identify factors that  – affect the risk level during emergency response. Technology for a better society 10
  • 11. Selected incidents for literature review A large incident:  – five or more deaths or irreversible disabilities; – damage to property or equipment for more than 30 million NOK; – irreversible environmental damage Based on this we ended up with 5 incidents. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. MS Sleipners shipwreck, 1999.  Åsta train accident, 2000.  Lillestrøm train fire, 2000.  Landslide in Ålesund, 2008. Wildfire Froland, 2008. Technology for a better society 11
  • 12. Main findings of literature review • The most important factors were  – lacking acknowledgement of risks due to lack of knowledge, or  – lacking assessment of risks, causing inadequate counter measures. • The most critical mistakes were made during the early stages  – before the external expertise arrives on the scene. Technology for a better society 12
  • 13. To address risk in emergency situations we need 1. Support for establishing critical information and scenario‐based decision support  prior to emergency situations 2. Support for analysing risks and supporting decision making during emergency  operations, especially during the initial phase Technology for a better society 13
  • 14. Support for dynamic risk analysis in emergency  situations Step I: Pre‐emergency risk analysis • • • Purpose:  Identify information  needs   When: Prior  Target group: Risk analysts of  municipalities Step II: Real‐time decision support => • • • Purpose: Support robust decision  making  When: During Target group: Operational  command Technology for a better society 14
  • 15. Step I: Pre‐emergency risk analysis and  information gathering Sub‐steps: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Develop incident scenarios Identify critical information needed to estimate likelihood and consequence Collect required information in terms of geographical data and store in GIS server Define functions for calculating consequence and likelihood based on information Define functions for calculating risks based on consequence and likelihood Enable access to stored data and dynamic data  Technology for a better society 15
  • 16. Example: explosion at chemical plant Threat Threat scenario Asset Technology for a better society 16
  • 17. Example: explosion at chemical plant s = source d = data a = analysis s1: d1: wind direction a1: s2: d2: wind speed a2: s5: Population registry d5: Number of people a5: [Likelihood] Strong wind Critical error Toxical chemicals released into atmosphere Toxical chemicals dispersed over 50000 km2 [Likelihood] Chemicals spread Explosion at through subway system chemical plant proximity to [Likelihood] subway access to sewers s3: Public transport d3: Subway map a3: major major moderate people Chemicals leaks into water supply [Likelihood] s4: Local authoritites d4: Map of sewage a4: Technology for a better society 17
  • 18. Step II: Real time decision‐support of dynamic  events • • • • Visualise results of pre‐emergency risk analysis to support decisions Simulate future scenarios by changing risk parameters Dynamic updates based on real‐time information Support robust decision making based on multiple criteria in dynamic environments Technology for a better society 18
  • 19. How did it end? • It has not ended! • We continue within the frame of the Bridge project funded by EU's security  programme – Technology for a better society 19
  • 20. BRIDGE System of Systems Training Command & Control Advanced Situation Awareness Incident Site • • • • • • Risk assessment by command centre Model the effect of explosives Model the dispersion of plume Unmanned Areal Vehicle Live Video from incident site Live environmental atmospheric data Emergency Response Teams Logistics Public Experts Victims BRIDGE Project Review, Stavanger (Norway), September 25th - 26th 2013 20
  • 21. Conclusions • Two focus areas: • establish critical information and scenario‐based decision support • solutions for efficient on‐site access to information and decision support • The project has conducted empirical studies, developed methodologies and various  prototype tools that has been tried out in practice in various settings; e.g. training  exercises • The development of several EMERGENCY artefacts are continued within the EU‐ project BRIDGE • NRK Rogaland:‐ rogaland/dkro99092513/25‐09‐2013 Technology for a better society 21
  • 22. EMERGENCY publications and reports in pdf‐emergency‐dissemination.htm Technology for a better society 22