Sensorpedia is a proposed web platform that would use established Web 2.0 technologies like blogs, subscriptions, and mashups to enable users to share sensor information. It aims to provide an alternative to costly systems integration by allowing registered users to create profiles, contribute and subscribe to sensor data feeds, and interface other sensor systems and applications to the platform through contributed modules. The goal is to facilitate information sharing around sensor data among enterprises, citizens, academia, and government organizations dealing with threats both natural and man-made.

1. Sensorpedia: Web 2.0 Sensor Information Sharing For: Gov 2.0 Boot Camp Knoxville, Tennessee 15 April 2009 By: Bryan L. Gorman Oak Ridge National Laboratory [email_address] +1.865.576.4241

2. Enterprises Citizens Academia Municipalities Media International Partners States Navy Air Force Army Marines DOD DOJ DCI DHS DOS DOD DOJ DOE DHS DOS EPA HUD HHS Federal Government Intelligence Community Military In a post 9/11 world, users, enterprises and governments rely more and more on networks for information sharing. The growing demand for information sharing Counties

3. On the domestic front, there are demonstrated examples of emergent and indeterminate, near-term and long-term threats, both natural and man-made, that require detection, analysis, and information sharing. The case for sensor information sharing: man-made and natural threats

4. The growing global market for sensors Unlike computers, printers, and memory sticks, these devices are not explicitly designed with universal plug-and-play interfaces to enterprise applications!

5. While it is technically feasible for all sectors of the sensor industry to support hardened and secure versions of the same plug-and-play interfaces that mass market vendors provide for consumer devices, sensor developers will postpone their own investment to implement specific features until a clear demand for common and established standards emerges in their markets. Market Inertia

6. The high cost of software engineering In the near-term, given the absence of interoperable, plug-and-play, net-ready sensors, the deployment of sensor networks for defense, security, research, and safety will continue to rely on costly software engineering and systems integration to interface sensors to enterprise applications .

7. Is there an alternative to systems integration or waiting for the market to deliver interoperable sensors?

8. User Innovation and Web 2.0

9. Individual Innovation ≠ Enterprise Innovation

10. Follow the innovators and “pave the cow paths” for everyone. An Alternative Approach

11. Tightly-coupled and loosely-coupled enterprise architectures Web 2.0 Enterprise Applications Application-Centric Tightly-Coupled Applications In-house Data Documented Business Cases Network –Centric Loosely-Coupled Services External Data Undocumented Ad Hoc Uses

12. http://sensorpedia.org

15. Backup Slides

16. DoD DHS OGC JPEO-CBD Standards Portfolio S&T Directorate Sensor Web Enablement Dr. Bert Coursey DHS Prof. Tom Johnson NPS Tom Swanson JPEO CBD Mr. Sam Bacharach OGC ANSI N42.32 ANSI N42.33 ANSI N42.34 ANSI N42.35 ANSI N42.38 ANSI N42.42 ASTM E54 AOAC International DHS Emergency Interoperability Consortium Ms. Elysa Jones OASIS Common Alerting Protocol Emergency Data Exchange Language Distribution Element Sensor Observation Service Sensor Planning Service Sensor Alerting Service NIST Sensor Interface Standards Mr. Kang Lee, NIST IEEE 1451.0 IEEE 1451.1 IEEE 1451.2 IEEE 1451.3 IEEE 1451.4 IEEE 1451.5 IEEE 1451.6 POC Activity Standards DOT IEEE Std 1512.3-2002 (HAZMAT Standard) Ann Lorscheider NCDOT Incident Management DoD NGIC GWG Tammera Countryman DIA DTM-2 MASINT (DIA) Distributed Common Ground Station (DCGS) Harmonization Emerging sensor standards Based on the slow progress we have observed over the last six years, it will be years before any of the emerging sensor standards are broadly adopted by industry —if they ever are. JPM-IS Data CBRN Common Data Model Common CBRN Sensor Interface (CCSI)

17. The Evolution of the Web Early 1990’s Mid 1990’s 2005 Early Web Sites Early Web Applications Early Social Webs from Designing for the Social Web by Joshua Porter

18. Web 1.0 vs. Web 2.0 Tool Kit managing editor contributing editors webmaster Web 2.0 Web Site Web 1.0 Web Site

19. “… a diverse collection of independently-deciding individuals is likely to make certain types of decisions and predictions better than individuals or even experts…” Collective Intelligence: The Wisdom of Crowds Diversity of opinion Independence Decentralization Aggregation Four required elements:

20. Faceted Classification: Everything is Miscellaneous “ A faceted classification system allows the assignment of multiple classifications to an object, enabling the classifications to be ordered in multiple ways, rather than in a single, pre-determined, taxonomic order.”

21. Web 1.0 sharing Web 2.0 sharing Sharing the Web 2.0 Way LinkedIn Study Group NY Times Article