2011.05.06 status standardisering gm-vv cogia


Published on

Published in: Technology, Sports
  • 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
  • Ballot announcement goes out to all SISO membersMembership rules:Apply for membership and pay feeCommiting to conduct thorough review and completing in required timeRepresentation: Commercial, Government, AcademicInterest: User, Developer, General InterestBalance guidelines:No representation should exceed 75% and each category >10%No organization >25%No interest >50%SAC approve compositionFirst ballot period 30-60 daysFormulate comments, suggest resolustion, determine whether to accept or reject the productComments, General, Editorial, Technical>75% of the ballots must be returned for a valid ballotIf >30% abstain, ballot invalidProducts which have a successful product ballot and have had no comments submitted shall proceed on tothe next step in the Balloted Products Development Process (Product Approval). Products which havecomments submitted by ballot group members shall have the comments resolved prior to product approval. Balloted products that do not have a successful product ballot shall go through the comment resolution and product ballot re-circulation.In the case where a consensus product is achieved, the PDG continues the product development process for accomplishing the final product approval and circulation.In the case where the process is halted, the community is advised. If proponents wish to attempt toresolve issues within the community and start the process again at a later time, they may.
  • 2011.05.06 status standardisering gm-vv cogia

    1. 1. Status update on GM-VV<br />Karl-Gustav Pettersson, FMV<br />ConstantinosGiannoulis, DSV/FOI<br />Swedish VV&A Competence network2011-05-06<br />FMV SMART-Lab<br />
    2. 2. Status update on GM-VV<br />Agenda<br /><ul><li>GM-VV Document set
    3. 3. GM-VV Volume 1: Introduction and overview
    4. 4. Walkthrough the document
    5. 5. Rationale
    6. 6. Standardization status of GM-VV
    7. 7. Introduktion av SISO
    8. 8. SISO standardiseringsprocess
    9. 9. SISO Balloting-process
    10. 10. Pilot Case Study
    11. 11. Objectives
    12. 12. Findings</li></li></ul><li>VV&A<br />Representation<br />Transformation<br />Abstraction<br />Ref:<br />W.F. Waite AEGIS TG <br />2004 JSMARTS vision 2020<br />
    13. 13. The GM-VV<br />Objectives<br /><ul><li>Provide a generic framework to develop an argument to justify why identified models, simulations, underlying data, outcomes and capabilities are believed to be acceptable for deployment in the target (intended) operational (use) context,
    14. 14. Define the required information and argumentation mechanisms allowing well-balanced and risk-informed arguments with various levels of formality for acceptance decision making,
    15. 15. Provide the community with a common language to better facilitate the communication and co-operation between all participants,</li></ul>Foundations<br /><ul><li>Well-established international standards,
    16. 16. knowledge and information management approach, enables formal and tool-supported sharing, transferring, managing and reusing of verification, validation and acceptance information at both project and enterprise levels.</li></li></ul><li>The GM-VV<br />The GM-VV document set<br /><ul><li>The GM-VV Volume 1: Introduction and Overview
    17. 17. The GM-VV Volume 2: Implementation Guide
    18. 18. The GM-VV Volume 3: Reference Manual</li></ul>The GenericMethodology for Verification & Validation<br />Is introduced and defined in <br />Provides guidance on implementation and use of<br />Provides technical and referentialbackground information for<br />Learns the basics of GM-VV from the<br />GM-VV Vol 1. Introduction and overview<br />M&S/VVAOrganizations and Personnel<br />GM-VV Vol 2. Implementation guide<br />Apply GM-VV by using the<br />GM-VV Vol 3. Reference Manual<br />Obtain VV&A and relatedbackground information on and for usewithin GM-VV from the <br />
    19. 19. GM-VV Rationale<br />
    20. 20. GM-VV Vol. 1<br />
    21. 21. GM-VV standardisation<br />The GM-VV document set<br /><ul><li>The GM-VV Volume 1: Introduction and Overview
    22. 22. (soon to be balloted)
    23. 23. The GM-VV Volume 2: Implementation Guide
    24. 24. (more comment rounds, then to be balloted)
    25. 25. The GM-VV Volume 3: Reference Manual
    26. 26. (more comment rounds, not to be balloted)</li></li></ul><li>Standardization process<br />What is SISO?<br /><ul><li>Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization (SISO)
    27. 27. Non profit organization
    28. 28. Based in the US but open to the international community
    29. 29. About 1200 members (20% non US)
    30. 30. Three annual workshops, two in the US and one in Europe
    31. 31. Three ways to become a member
    32. 32. Annual fee ~$100
    33. 33. Participate in a conference ~$700
    34. 34. Member of a sponsoring organization or corporate</li></ul>http://www.sisostds.org<br />”SISO’s mission is to provide an open forum that promotes the interoperability and reuse of models and simulations through the exchange of ideas, the examination of technologies, and the development of standards.”<br />
    35. 35. Standardization process<br />Overview of the SISO standardization process<br />Maturation of concept<br />Sponsor Organization<br />Study Group<br />Standing Study Group<br />Product Nomination<br />Development of standard<br />Product Development Group<br />Balloted Standard<br />Product Support Group<br />
    36. 36. Standardization process<br />Preliminary Ballot Group<br />SISO Balloting process<br />PDG vote to go to balloting<br />Ballot Pool<br />Membership rules<br />Interme-diate Ballot Group<br />Final drafted product to SAC for approval<br />SISO Members<br />Ballot Group<br />Balance guidelines<br />Other interested people<br />SAC announce Ballot<br />Product approval<br />SAC announce Ballot<br />Balloting<br />Comment resolution<br />
    37. 37. Ballot balancing rules<br />Membership rules:<br />Balance guidelines:<br />Apply for membership and pay fee<br />Committing to conduct thorough review and completing in required time<br />Representation: Commercial, Government, Academic<br />Interest: User, Developer, General Interest<br />No representation should exceed 75% and each category >10%<br />No organization >25%<br />No interest >50%<br />
    38. 38. The GM-VV: Pilot Case Study <br />
    39. 39. Pilot Case Study<br />Introduction<br />Rationale<br />Objectives<br />Technology readiness level is 4 (Component and/or Breadboard Validated in Laboratory Environment Setting)<br />Test the method in a real environment (improve, involve, strengthen)<br />Correctness and utility of the document set*<br />Practical applicability of GM-VV: knowledge & experience<br />Educational material development (tutorials)<br />Tools (evaluation, requirements)<br />
    40. 40. Pilot Case Study Scenario: FileProof<br />Rijkswaterstaat(2006-2008) aimed at:<br />Immediate reduction of traffic jams by means of smart, innovative and practical approaches<br />About 60 projects in 3 main categories:<br />Projects aimed at reduction of regular and incidental traffic jams <br />Projects tempting people to think and act differently<br />
    41. 41. Pilot Case Study Scenario: FileProof<br />Our Focus: Flashing lights off On site<br />Why Flashing Lights<br />Reduction of speed<br />Not to draw attention to an accident<br />Directive<br />First vehicle (fend off car) lights ON<br />Other cars (rescue workers) lights OFF<br />Compliance in practice?<br />Falls short of expectations<br />
    42. 42. What are the effects of showing one or multiple flashing lights on:<br />The safety of rescue workers on site, and<br />Traffic flow<br />Effect of light color (blue or amber / yellow)?<br />Effect of time of day (daylight / evening)?<br />Effect of position accident (own lane or other direction)?<br />Pilot Case Study Scenario: FileProof<br />
    43. 43. Introduction<br />Pilot Case Study Scenario: FileProof<br />Approach<br />Deliverables<br />5 workshops, 4 nations (FR, NL, DE, SE)<br />Focus on Technical Processes & Products<br />Spiral Development (iterative & incremental)<br />White Paper<br />Authoritative & Educational Illustration<br />Benefits, Limitations & Improvements<br />Introductory Tutorial Presentation<br />Dissemination for M&S Community<br />Illustration & Guidance Application<br />
    44. 44. The Case Study<br />The content of the document has a steep learning curve with a high entry level<br />Wording is long, fuzzy, vague and pressumes a lot<br />Misleading titles creating false expectations<br />No leading document driving the reader<br />Weak cross-document proof reading<br />There is no document that specifies THE methodology<br />Bits & bytes scattered among the 3 documents<br />HB perspective not clearly communicated<br />Multiple objectives set<br />Overlapping information & inconsistencies<br />Incompatible to SISO product nomination<br />More cases<br />Pilot Case Study Scenario: Findings<br />
    45. 45. Status Update on GM-VV<br />Tack!Frågor?<br />