Interoperability - Science topic

We, as humans, use myths, stories, and spiritual thoughts to interoperating the world around us. However, most of our thoughts are compromised by biases. Mathematical models are helping us to create a consensus among the different segments of society. Are these models have alternatives?

The May 2022 issue of Canadian Healthcare Technology magazine has a feature report on the expansion of Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems to include genetic data. The article touches on a very important point in the first sentence, that a pan-[insert country here] EHR systems are mostly far off in many places, but in my view these would undoubtedly be beneficial to patients.

There is a regulatory and privacy landscape to navigate in different parts of the world, and a, sharing information between various states, provinces or regions, let alone hospitals within a single geography, is mostly a process covered in red tape and facilitated by the disappointingly familiar CNG tone of fax machines over a telephone line. Patient and clinician friendly processes and interfaces, along with built-in data standardization, a focus on computer-readable data capture, and interoperability are key to bringing genomic medicine into the digital age. The complexity and enormous potential of genetics and genomics in day-to-day clinical practice requires new approaches beyond pen/paper records and new technology beyond facsimile and traditional EHR systems to take us towards a better, healthier future. I would encourage you to read the article (linked below) and provide your thoughts on the subject.

Whether someone is interested in such a research and/or topic, question may be extended to other related topics

Hello everyone,

I am asking very general question, but i would appreciate if someone helps me. I want to use ROS for manufacturing process (Not robots) as a middleware that can create simulated Cyber physical system environment to enabling the interoperability of different nodes in real time. Before start involving in ROS, i would like to ask you below questions.

Thanks a ton

According to modern regulations, the seismic design of buildings is based on the ability requirements of the correct design of the nodes and plasticity.

The (inevitable) inelastic behavior under strong seismic excitation is directed at selected elements and failure mechanisms.

In particular, the incorrect design of the nodes and the clearly limited plasticity of the components lead to major failures.

1) The philosophy of the correct design of the nodes of the regulations is characterized by the appropriate dimensioning of columns-beams so that we have plastic joints in the beams and not in the columns so that we do not have immediate collapse.

Question right or wrong?

Answer

Without the inelastic behavior the bearing would not show plastic joints in the beams.

I believe that displacement control is better than what they apply today which is nothing more than the management of inevitable inelastic displacement and failure.

Displacement control means no failure no plastic joint

It basically means controlling the deformation.

Deformation control also means control in failures since deformation and failures are directly connected.

If you do not have the ability to control the distortion then you manage it with the proper design of the nodes and that is good.

But being able to control the deformation of the construction is better.

2) The plasticity of structural elements and structures made of reinforced concrete is characterized by their ability to deform beyond the leakage limit, without significantly reducing their strength

According to § 5.2.1 of EC8 there is a design option of the available plasticity of the building.

Reinforced concrete buildings can be studied with two different design methods.

a) To be designed with the necessary ductility which means to have the required - necessary ability to consume seismic energy, but without losing their resistance to all loads during the rocking of the earthquake.

b) To be designed with low ductility, with low energy consumption, but with very high dynamics. The ductility or interoperability of the structural elements and nodes (exists) is achieved with the existence of the appropriate reinforcement, the construction devices, the proper dimensioning and the limitation of the axial loads to some limits.

Plasticity is a critical factor for seismic constructions for many reasons.

At the carrier level with inelastic analyzes you also find the levels of plasticity that the construction can develop.

Question right or wrong?

Answer

If the seismic energy (measured by ground acceleration) is too large, it will produce excessively large displacements that will cause a very high curvature in the vertical and horizontal elements.

If the curvature is too high, this means that the rotation of the sections of columns and beams will be well above the elastic area (Compressive concrete deformation over 0.35% and reinforcement fiber stresses over 0.2 %) beyond the leakage limit.

When the rotation exceeds this limit of elasticity, the structure begins to "dissolve the energy storage" through plastic displacement, which means that the parts will have a residual displacement that will not be able to be recovered (while in the elastic region all displacements are recovered).

Basically the design of the strength of a current building is limited to the limits of the elastic design range, and then passes to the default plastic leak areas, which are default areas of small and many leak failures, (usually designed to occur at the ends of the beams) so as not to collapse the structure.

This is the mechanism of plasticity that consumes seismic energy.

(Structure collapses when oblique / failed columns fail)

If the parts that experience the plastic deformations exceed the breaking point limit, and there are too many on the structure, the structure will collapse.

Basically, plasticity is achieved by placing a dense reinforcing connector at the ends of the elements because this helps to create many and small cracks, avoiding the creation of large catastrophic cracks.

Plasticity is directly related to the cooperation of concrete and steel (mechanism of relevance)

The most serious problem of relevance is created by the ultra-tensile strength of the steel, which turns the failure into a shear form, which is extremely brittle. When the shear stresses in the steel concrete interface reach their limit value, the correlation is destroyed in the form of concrete rupture.

Part of the reduction in stresses is achieved by increasing the overlap and reducing the diameter of the reinforcement bars. The increase of their limit value is achieved by increasing the strength of the concrete. The presence of transverse reinforcement acts favorably by restricting the opening of the developing cracks.

3) The columns or walls are rigid and flexible. It depends on the cross section in relation to the height and the beams that are connected etc. (Frames etc)

Question right or wrong?

Answer

Yes it is right ... the relationship between the height and the size of the cross section determines whether the elements are rigid or flexible.

But there are other factors such as the cross-sectional shape factor. A square column cross-section is more flexible than a cross-section of the same size which has the shape of a cross, angle or wall.

So we can design rigidly with walls if we want.

The walls may be located around the perimeter of the building (excluding shop facades) surrounding the stairwell and the elevator (strong cores) and may be internal walls (eg partition walls) throughout the height of the building. The installation of many strong walls implies, of course, due to their great rigidity, a significant reduction of the fundamental eigenperiod of construction. This, in combination with the view q = 1, leads to a correspondingly large increase in the seismic loads of the structure. However, it should not be overlooked that precisely because of the many and strong walls the strength increases more or conversely the cross-sectional loads decrease despite the increase of seismic loads.

Due to the fact that the wall has a double lever (that of height and that of width) the axial forces (kN) are smaller than they are in the column.

4) The diaphragm function ensures approximately the same movements of nodes in a plane (in a horizontal direction) which has the effect, among other things, to facilitate the analysis in space taking into account three degrees of freedom instead of six if you do not have a diaphragm. We should not confuse them with the walls. The coexistence of walls and columns is the most suitable formation for seismic structures made of reinforced concrete and especially for structures with many floors.

Question right or wrong?

Answer

Yes, correct for the diaphragm function of the plates.

The walls also have a diaphragm function under certain conditions. If the width and height do not have big differences then yes, and the walls are of diaphragm function. If they are both prestressed and anchored to the ground, then they are super diaphragmatic.

If you combine the diaphragm function of the slab and the compacted and prestressed walls, you have achieved complete rigidity, with zero same period and zero deformation which means zero failures.

In order to ensure the device-level interoperability in IoT where two devices with different communication protocols can talk to each other, different solutions exist utilizing either server, broker, middleware, or gateways. Can someone highlight the difference between these when used in IoT?

Is it possible to provide interoperability among Information Systems using domain ontology?

if domain ontology is enough for providing interoperability then why upper-level ontologies are required?

As you probably know the concepts of Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI), National SDI (NSDI), Urban SDI, Gloabl SDI (GSDI). The question I have is that how we handle the relationship between NSDI and Urban SDI. You know there is resolution/detail/purpose difference between NSDI and Urban SDI. However, there has to be coherency between NSDI and urban SDI to continue the services of central government and local government. Please describe and give me some resources about how to bridge NSDI and urban SDI to provide interoperability.

Hi,

I am porting the CommServer software family to GitHub and publishing the products as the open-source. Visit the following page to get more:

From the community reaction, I know that people are going to reuse this software also for research Machine To Machine interoperability. Let me ask you if you have any idea about the priority I shall apply to my road map. The list of products I am going to publish you can find here: CommServer products

OPC UA Address Space Model Designer and OPC UA Viewer are done.

Thanks for any advice.

Dear Collaborator,

We are researchers at the University of Sao Paulo, Brazil. We are carrying out an online survey to investigate which strategies have been used by industrial practitioners and researchers for achieving interoperability concerns (e.g., technical, syntactic, semantic, organizational interoperability).

With your valuable contribution, we also intend to understand the benefits and drawbacks of existing interoperability solutions.

Therefore, we would kindly invite you to answer the survey available in <http://limesurvey.labes.icmc.usp.br/index.php/225146?lang=en>.

Participation in the study typically takes 20 minutes and is strictly anonymous.

We will provide a digital CERTIFICATE for participants who require it.

We appreciate if you can forward this invitation to your colleagues.

Thank you for your participation,

For more information, feel free to contact us

Kind regards,

PhD(c) Pedro Henrique Dias Valle (pedrohenriquevalle@usp.br)

Lina Garcés, PhD (linamgr@icmc.usp.br)

Prof. Dr. Elisa Yumi Nakagawa (elisa@icmc.usp.br)

Dear Collaborator,

We are researchers at the University of Sao Paulo, Brazil. We are carrying out an online survey to investigate which strategies have been used by industrial practitioners and researchers for achieving interoperability concerns (e.g., technical, syntactic, semantic, organizational interoperability).

With your valuable contribution, we also intend to understand the benefits and drawbacks of existing interoperability solutions.

Therefore, we would kindly invite you to answer the survey available in http://limesurvey.labes.icmc.usp.br/index.php/225146?lang=en

Participation in the study typically takes 20 minutes and is strictly anonymous.

We will provide a digital CERTIFICATE for participants who require it.

We appreciate if you can forward this invitation to your colleagues.

Thank you for your participation,

For more information, feel free to contact us

Kind regards,

PhD(c) Pedro Henrique Dias Valle (pedrohenriquevalle@usp.br)

Lina Garcés, PhD (linamgr@icmc.usp.br)

Prof. Dr. Elisa Yumi Nakagawa (elisa@icmc.usp.br)

What frameworks are available for transferring PGHD into EHR?

We started importing EDIF from Tanner2016 to OA, to be able to design and to interchange the OA database between Tanner2019 and Cadence IC6.1.8. However the interoperability of this schematics in OA fails!

Any design schematics from CDS are fully readable and fully useable in Tanner2018 and Tanner2019. The same applies also for Layouts and Symbols from CDS into Tanner.

We see OA-interoperability problems when comming with OA-database from Tanner2018/Tanner2019 into CDS 6.1.8. Virtuoso schematic editor:

1.) invisible "ghost" wires: they physically are existing/moveable/contactable, but are not visible

2.) TannerFakeNet wires: where EDIF-Tanner used zero-length net-names directly placed on a block symbol (we corrected it in Tanner and imported anew) after Tanner2019 OA import (which was in Tanner readble) we used the OA database in CDS, but IC6.1.8. did not recognize this short stump/stub and place "TannerFakeNet" in net-wire name light-blue-color (CDS wire default color).

3.) wires carrying "Not Checked Yet" property: which leads to a behaviour, that the whole wire looses its original name (TannerOA) and when this net is connected to a pin, then it causes in CDS an error, because no-net-name wire being connected to a pin. This behaviour does not vanish in CDS when we delete all the wires and redraw the wiring anew.

3A) then we started to delete the pins to be able to overwrite the netname. This did not help, deleting pin leads to still stacking net-name "Not Checked Yet", we are not able to correct the net-name even without pin.

_____________________________________________________________________

We further evaluated the behaviour of the lost net-name (Not Checked Yet).

1.) We see, that the untouched schematic in read-only mode, just after being copied directly from Tanner (Win to Linx directory copy) is initially clean. All wires are available, each wire carries its original name.

The problem starts as soon as we open the schematic in CDS in edit mode and run initial check-and-save. This immediately generates the unvisible wires and some wires looses its name (they get the "Not Checked Yet" property). Probably the intial netlisting causes that from the OA database this missing net-name is loaded to the schematic view ???

2.) We deleted sequentially all the pins in CDS schematic editor and running CDS check-and-save, to delete potential source of problems (no pin => not net-name error, and to be able later include new pins per name). When the last Pin in CDS is deleted, then first the CDS Schematic windows crashes and after 10-15 sec also the whole Cadence IC6.1.8 crashes.

3.) we ran "oascan" over the database and it was clean. Also selectively over the destroyed schematic cell. no error, no repair occurs.

4.) we see in CDS Schematic Editor that in the corruct OA-schematic from Tanner2019, each pin comming from Tanner carries 3 additional properties: .

TannerOriginalName = VEEA, TannerPortGlobal=0, Tanner PortType=6.

These 3 properties can be deleted in CDS, but the pin or the whole OA schematic is still somehow corrupted. The OA-resaving in CDS is not able to delete the problem in OA, since even pins without Tanner properties causes schematic errors. CDS never can clean the OA-format problems which occurs when saving in Tanner.

___________________________________________________________________

We see, that any OA database generated in CDS IC6.1.8 is readable, usable in Tanner2019. There are no problems with Layout, nor with Schematic, nor with Symbol. Thus the way CDS => Tanner is working, but the reverse was Tanner => CDS does not work for OA. Thus the OA-interoperability is not working between Tanner and CDS

___________________________________________________________________ We conclude, that there must be a problem in writing OA format or reading the OA with additional feature. But we can not conclude where the problem is located, as we are not familiar with OA standard.

_____________________________________________________________________

Thank you very much for any comments in advance.

What do you think about the interoperability of Low power wide area IoT devices belonging to different LPWAN technologies? As a subset of LPWAN IoT protocols operates in unlicensed sub-GHz band (like LoRa, Sigfox) while some other protocols operate on licensed spectrum (NB-IoT). How is it possible to make them integrate/compatible with each other? How about relaying both LoRa and NB-IoT through a single gateway?

Interoperability plays an important role to the effectiveness of Industry 4.0 technologies. According to your view, how important is it to successfull of Industry 4.0 technologies?

What are performance indicators in interoperable trust model of IoT systems?

Considering public administration continuous efforts to follow and serve public purposes and needs, covering comprehensive areas and wide variety of sectors, how to ensure the most convenient approach to research, measure, redefine or redescribe, so to ensure the most suitable "tailor made" solutions, meeting specific needs and expectations.

Department: ICT.

Phase: Research Proposal

I am planning to do a feasibility study for storing Electronic Health Records (EHRs) on a permission-ed (consortium) blockchain.

I would like to prove or disprove that blockchain technologies could be used to address challenges that traditional client-server EHR systems are facing for example data breaches, privacy compromises, health record tampering, interoperability, audibility, and fraud.

I hope the background is sufficient.

Primary Objective :

Devise an architecture/framework/model for the use of blockchain technology to decentralize and secure the sharing of electronic health records.

I am having trouble to understand the diffidence between an architecture, framework, and model.

Then in your option which term would be more suitable to use for my study.

Thank you in advance.

Hello everyone,

I'l searching for a SDN solution to assure interoperability between sensors connecting on Zigbee and Bluetooth.

I'll appreciate your help. thank you :*

- organisational interoperability

- access control

- ontology

- or other technologies

I want to find interoperability maturity model for hospital information system? also i want to undrestand how to evaluated it?

Interoperability and standardization of data in agriculture is huge problem. There is number of standardization efforts, but which standards are relevant for agriculture?

Hi, all.

Wondering about Enterprise Performance Perspectives (such as postulated by BSC), each Perspective reveals an expectation expressed by stakeholders and managers, and it also may regard such as an "aggregation" of Performance Indicators(PI).

For instance, in this hypothetical scenario:

How to ensure interoperability of converter stations from different manufacturers in DC Grid?

Hi all, is there a very general and interoperable technical for online practical work in analog electronic?

don't an expensive solution !

Ontologies are playing important role for interoperability in IoT that we can see there are several exist ontologies for IoT but I am just wondering whether it is possible to extend ontology for IoT with trust concept. 

Does anyone has ideas about it? 

Thanks so much. 

New information technologies like interoperability and data sharing are essential in the development of  hazard management systems but in developing countries where there are no tradition and previous experiences in the management of those new technologies the adoption process is quite difficult.

Can anybody tell me what is the best congress or journal to publish a work that explains the difficulties of technological adoption (specifically in hazard management and information standards areas) and a strategy for the adoption of those technologies in developing world? (take in account that as in any developing country I have no funds)

Thanks in advance

BigData can store Structured, Semi-structured and non-structured data.

I am working on improving CAD interoperability between different CAD formats of two different software packages based on different semantics. I am thinking on developing a new modelling approach for improving or possibly eliminating interoperability losses in CAD exchanges.

COAR (Confederation of Open Access Repositories) provides such a service

"Smart" or "connected cities" are very much of the moment, with large amount of research funds (collaborative and pure), being directed in this area but the activity is often in terms of smaller scale and specific demonstrator projects evidencing aspects of a larger envisaged solution. When do we think we will see true smart cities and what will they look like?

Area: Software Defined Networking

Please give me information about evaluated interoperability..

summary electronic health  record has related and important information about patient. It needs suitable content and structure for interoperability.

I am aware of COBie for the exchange of information at the handover stage of a building and know that you can get at least a part of that information from BIM authoring software (e.g. with the ArchiCAD COBie translator for IFC export).

My question is: which type of information is the most useful to collect directly in the model instead of mapping it externally?

I am a strong believer in keeping BIM models lean and clean and devoid of any information that is redundant. E.g. room size and volume is directly related to the model (Zone/Room/Space depending on the software you use), but area requirements or manufacturing specs seem to belong to the requirement system and not directly from the model.

I've read about pumping all kinds in the model for handover, which I see as a useless effort and lowering the chances of successful interoperability.

I want to start research in the area of cloud interoperability. Please provide guidelines. 

Natural hazard management systems use to have different components. Backend systems composed by a web server, database, modelling and analysis systems and a frontend in a form of a fat client or simple a web dashboard. Can you tell us about your experience designing and using this kind of systems and what is the importance of interoperability in the development of those systems? 

Discuss how a number of autonomous system having different types of platforms (functional as well as technical) interact with each other and work together

In my work I have outlined a few formal rules to ensure interoperability of IT systems. My approach is based on an analysis of the information exchanged. Can you point out an interesting source of knowledge for these issues?

(n+1) Am trying to reinvent a geospatial DNA coding here!

(n) The never ending question about what ones do made me think again about that below (GISS, GIGF and GIHAD) ... and now I think that GISS should be kept more about Geographical Information System of Systems to be reminiscent of the GEOSS but to keep the old ambivalence GIS as Geographical Information Science or as Geographical Information System, GISS could be also Geospatial Information Science of Systems or GGISS if we want to keep the Geocomputational component prominent.

Then now Geocomputational Information & Social Statistics can be GISoS or GGISoS idem with GGIGF,GGIHAD.

(n-1) Some time ago somebody asked on ResearchGate what would be the future of GIS ... now I have better answer than the one I gave at that time:

GISS (Geocomputational Information & Social Statistics),

GIGF (Geocomputational Information & Geoscience Forecasts)

and GIHAD (Geocompuational Information Health And Disease) ... which would have as common factor the oldy GIS, transformed by the demanding for modelling and processing within their contextual fields ...