Below is a brief summary of the Governance EoIs; please correct any errors that I may have in summarizing your proposals (as it is most definitely not intended).  Looking forward to working with all of you.  Thanks!

 

EARTHCUBE – Strategic Organizational Framework (Centralized Model)

1015 Submitted by Hannes E. Leetaru.  Team and Partners: Illinois State Geological Survey, university of Illinois, national Center for Supercomputing Applications, Scripps Institute, City University of New York, Department of Energy, and National Snow and Ice Data Center.

 

Summary:  Provide a centralized open access archive of all publicly available geosciences data with format translation, metadata, cross-disciplinary portals tailored to specific needs of the end user.  Technical team with experience in science portals and petabyte architectures (e.g. XSEDE, Blue Waters, and GISolve).  Primary focus on centralized archival data environment with requirements gathering for the various sciences supported.  Supports centralized model rather than federated model since the federated model “is simply not capable of integrating and analyzing the petabyte datasets of the next decade.”  Pros of the centralized model are uniform high-speed access, archival backups/format translation, and integration of multiple petabyte datasets from across domains.  Concept of modular services in the system with reference to GenBank LSST governance models.  Sustainability of the system to be determined, but proposed as annual per-disk use and membership fees.

 

NSF Earth Cube Expression of Interest: Designing a community-based framework for modeling the consequences of climate change on coastal systems

1016 Submitted by Gary Crane.  Team and Partners: Southeastern Universities Research Association (SURA).

 

Summary: Develop a cyberinfrastructure to support coordinated models and observational systems to understand, predict, and mitigate anticipated climate change scenarios along the coast lines.  Specifically in the fields of meteorology, hydrology, oceanography, ecosystem science, and socioeconomics.  Proposes multiple workshops among multi-disciplinary institutions to form a governance model and cyberinfrastructure to support the assessment and validation of coastal models.  The underlying theme is “connecting models across multiple disciplines, building the required cyber and data infrastructure and assessing the skill of models.”  SURA is a partner in the XSEDE and has a leadership role in USIOOS Coastal Ocean Modeling Testbed.

 

EarthCube – An Open Geoscience Community

1019 Submitted by David R. Maidment.  Team and Partners: OGC

 

Summary: Proposal to model EarthCube governance similar to the Open Geospatial Consortium with regularly scheduled meetings once every three months and a committee structure.  To promote a forum to discuss the disparate community on common standards and approaches for discovering, accessing, and processing existing data while providing models for publishing new datasets that enhance “information discovery and knowledge development.”  If such a structure is created, rotating the meetings between currently supported data and modeling centers will permit participants to have a more hands-on approach to data needs and requirements in the various communities.

 

Expression of Interest in Development of an Organizational Framework for EarthCube

1053 Submitted by David Arctur.  Team and Partners: UT Austin CIESS, NSIDC, Clemson University, UCAR/Unidata, UIUC/NCSA, University of Arkansas CAST, CUAHSI, EarthScope, UCSD/SDSC, USGIN, Johns Hopkins Data Conservancy, UCSD/Calit2/Scripps OOI CI, Columbia University CIESIN, Columbia University IEDA.

 

Summary: Provide a Strategic Organizational Framework for EarthCube based on the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) governance model which is based on consensus-based community processes.  OGC participation includes academia, industry, and governments as well as alliances with major IT standards organizations such as ISO, W3C, OASIS, IETF.  Six proposed activities include:

  1. Regularly occurring meetings
  2. Virtual community between face-to-face meetings
  3. Definition of consensus policy and procedures
  4. Working groups
  5. Promotion of incubator projects
  6. Consensus agreement on reference architecture and open standards


OpenQuake Social Networking for EarthCube

1055 Submitted by Geoffrey Fox.  Team and Partners: Andrea Donnellan (USC/JPL), Geoffrey Fox (IU), Dennis McLeod (USC), Marlon Pierce (IU), and John Rundle (UC Davis).

 

Summary: Build the next generation of QuakeSim as OpenQuake Infomall.  Explore development of social networking and information management tools to improve the ability of earthquake researchers to undertake collaborative research and provide real time responses.  Use existing social networking platforms.  Build on experiences of sites such as e-Humanities and NanoHub.   Eventually the system will be built for/on “lightweight clients” (smartphones and tablets), Web 2.0 sites, data sharing/exchange techniques, cloud computing, and open source software.  Includes collaboration with existing internet “giants” and GIS software. 

 

GeoNet: A Confederation of Scientific Data Networks

1064 Submitted by M. Lee Allison.  Team and Partners: Kevin Gallager (USGS, USGIN), Carol Meyer (ESIP Federation), Stephen M. Richard (USGIN, NGDS, IUGS-CGI), Douglas Walker (Univ. of KS, Earthchem, National Geoinformatics Community), Ilya Zaslavsky (San Diego Supercomputer Center, CUAHSI-HIS), Jerry Hubbard (Energistics, National Data Repository), William Michener (Univ. of NM, DataONE), Dan Stanzione, Jr. (Texas Advanced Computing Center, iPlant Collaborative), Tim Ahern (IRIS), Brian Wee (NEON), Ian Jackson (OneGeology), Lesley Wyborn (Geoscience Australia, AuScope, Australian National Data Service), John Broome (Natural Resources Canada, Geological Survey of Canada), David Arctur (OGC).

 

Summary: Build a Community of Practice (CoP) of broad-based scientific data networks converging towards the creation of an integrated global digital data framework.  GeoNet will leverage existing and emerging technologies and practices to facilitate enhanced and interoperable cyberinfrastructure.  The collaboration of existing data networks in the geosciences and other domain sciences provides a unique opportunity to coordinate activities while collaborating on standards and protocols for a shared cyberinfrastructure to expedite and ensure global interoperability.  Proposal to facilitate the leveraging of these resources to create common standards and protocols, engage the vast number of distributed data resources, establish practices for the recognition of and respect for intellectual property, develop simple data and resource discovery systems, build mechanisms to encourage development of web service tools and workflows for data analysis, create sustainable business models for continuing maintenance and evolution of information resources, and integrate the data management life-cycle into professional and cultural practice of science.  Project will examine governance options in association with other proposal teams.

Tags: research

Views: 100

Replies to This Discussion

I think we missed one in this list:

1022 Submitted by Jim Bowring and colleagues

Summary: 

This critical milestone is the establishment of an active, collaborative, software development community for EarthCube. The first steps toward forming this community were taken at the Charrette by bringing together software engineers, informatics professionals, computer scientists, and domain scientists with an interest in building EarthCube infrastructure. We propose to continue this progress by establishing a Community of Practice (CoP) as a more
formal collaborative software engineering and informatics community that is informed by the geoscience community and that lays the foundation for a software governance organization. This CoP will provide human and software resources and best practice guidance, including from domain scientists, for EarthCube projects from conceptualization and formation through completion. This CoP will also drive the creation of a governance organization for EarthCube to support sustainable software development that will model other successful governance organizations such as the Apache Software Foundation (ASF), which has successfully sustained the development of significant open source projects (e.g., Tomcat, Hadoop, and the Apache HTTP Server). This governance organization (tentatively named the EarthCube Software Foundation - ESF) would provide vehicles for the CoP to engage members of the EarthCube science community who are planning proposals with significant software development components. These vehicles would likely include an on-line presence featuring resources, people, interactive match-making for proposals, blogs, experience reports, and forums. Thus, the scientific motivation for achieving this critical milestone is to support and facilitate the achievement of EarthCube science goals. As the EarthCube initiative matures, the CoP would work to evolve these collaborations to ensure that science goals and software infrastructure are effectively aligned.

RSS

Connect with EarthCube!

Members

Discussion Forum

EarthCube Governance Call - This Friday, May 3, 11am EDT 1 Reply

Hi all,There's a governance call this Friday to discuss governance and community engagement project updates.  We haven't held a call in a while, and there are quite a few updates to share.We're still working on the agenda, so if you have any agenda…Continue

Tags: engagement, community, earthcube, governance

Started by Genevieve Pearthree. Last reply by Genevieve Pearthree May 2, 2013.

© 2014   Created by Dennis Carey.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations presented in this material are only those of the presenter grantee/researcher, author, or agency employee; and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.