OOIFB will establish ‘Action Items’ as a way to focus on particular issues. In some cases, the Action Item will require the establishment of either ad hoc or permanent working groups.
At the first meeting of the OOIFB in May 2017, the following Action Items were agreed upon by consensus.
Action: OOIFB- 2017-1: Form an OOIFB Ad-hoc Working Group on Data Dissemination and Cyber Infrastructure (DDCI).
Charge of the OOIFB Ad-hoc Working Group on Data Dissemination and Cyber Infrastructure (DDCI):
To facilitate the assessment of OOI data quality by the scientific community, and to accelerate the integration of OOI infrastructure usage into project proposals and scientific publications, the OOIFB will establish an ad-hoc Working Group to identify near-term obstacles to the delivery of data to the science community and to create recommendations for removing these obstacles. The Data Dissemination and Cyber Infrastructure (DDCI) Working Group will include subject matter experts and cyberinfrastructure (CI) experts to review the current status of the CI component of the OOI and the existing development plans. OOIFB members Tim Crone and Jim O’Donnell will serve as co-chairs, and Brian Glazer will serve as a member. Representatives of the Marine Implementing Organizations and representatives of earlier CI Review Panels will be included as members. Representatives of the OOI CI team will be asked to participate. There are other operational systems that aggregate and disseminate marine, earth, and atmospheric sciences data and the DDCI Working Group will consider input from those enterprises. The Working Group will report to the OOIFB in August 2017.
Update 8/15/17 – DDCI is learning more about uFrame and ERDDAP and starting direct discussions with the CI team.
Tim Crone, LDEO (OOIFB Member)
Jim O’Donnell, UCONN (OOIFB Member)
Brian Glazer, UH (OOIFB Member)
Derrick Snowden, NOAA
Orest Kawka, UW
Stephanie Petillo WHOI
Richard Signell, USGS
Mary Jo Richardson, TAMU
Action: OOIFB- 2017-2 – Refresh OOI Traceability Matrices and Create a Conceptual Diagram of relative O&M costs versus relevance of OOI Infrastructure assets
Step 1: Refresh the traceability matrices that are included as Appendices in the document, Ocean Observatories Initiative (OOI) Scientific Objectives and Network Design: A Closer Look, 2009.
Step 2: Create a figure (or figures) similar to Figure 3.9 of the Sea Change: 2015- 2025 Decadal Survey of Ocean Sciences NAS report that focuses on OOI Infrastructure. Figure 3-9 is a conceptual diagram of relative operation and maintenance costs versus relevance of infrastructure assets.
Timeline – The refreshed matrices and figure are needed for the November NSB meeting. Preliminary data is needed by the summer.
OOIFB should hold a web conference in 3 to 4 weeks.
- Action OOIFB-2017-2A Request data from OOI regarding the status of sensors/instruments. (6/14/2017 Conference Call)
- Action OOIFB02017-2B – OOIFB Matrices Review – First Cut. (6/14/2017 Conference Call)
8/1/17 Preliminary test refresh of traceability matrices accomplished that leds to new insights on what information on sensors and platforms is needed.
8/15/17 Information received from OOI on sensor and platform status. OOIFB considering what information is most useful to researchers and does not place an undue burden on operators.
Suggestions for future OOIFB action items:
Action: OOIFB- 2017-3 (pending FB discussion) – Establish policies for adding infrastructure to arrays:
It is important to have clear guidance regarding the processes by which instruments may become core infrastructure. How will priorities be established for adding infrastructure onto arrays or into array space if there are space-instrument restrictions (e.g. three PI’s would like to put an instrument in the same place, on the same port, one instrument interferes with the other instruments etc.)? As a follow-on, when infrastructure is full (e.g. all ports are used), how will additional infrastructure be added to expand the networks (e.g. additional moorings, additional junction boxes)?
Action: OOIFB- 2017-4 (pending FB discussion)- Form Sensor Working Groups:
It would be good to establish sensor working groups that could focus on the data evaluation that would inform on both data quality and possible refresh. Early in the program (e.g. the subcommittees formed as part of the Science Technical Advisory Committee – 80 community members as volunteers) there were very successful working groups focused on engineering, science, modeling etc.