Mission Validation of the projects results through the three use cases Validation of Dicodes suite of services in the three use cases, and carefully elaborate –a series of real scenarios of the foreseen solutions use, –to produce advanced efficient and cost- effective work methodologies for the problems and settings under consideration.
Mission Through WP6 (leader: BRF), the project pays much attention to the validation and assessment of the services developed and integrated in WP3-WP5 through three real use cases. Dedicated metrics and instruments will be designed and exploited to evaluate the overall solution and assess the performance of the associated trials. WP6 provides valuable feedback for the refinement and improvement of the work being performed in WP3-WP5.
Objectives The objective of this workpackage is to evaluate the outcomes of the Dicode project (i.e. suite of services and innovative work methodologies) through three use cases and ensure their usability and acceptability. The foreseen evaluation will be performed by using properly formulated metrics and instruments, which take into consideration the output of WP2. From an overall point of view, WP6 aims to access how the Dicode solutions can improve the processing of voluminous and complex data in collaboration and decision making settings. It will also access the readiness of these solutions for the market based on the outcomes of Task 2.2 and a dedicated cost- effectiveness analysis (thus supporting the dissemination and exploitation activities of WP7). The output from the first phase of evaluation in WP6 provides feedback for the work to be performed in WP2 (Task 2.5).
Description of work Task 6.1: The Dicode evaluation framework (months 6-10, Leader: UOL, Participants: IMA, BRF, PUB). Work to be done in this task concerns the identification of indicators (metrics) on which the evaluation will focus Also, the design of instruments to elicit data and evidence, thus speeding up the gathering of user feedback.
Description of work Task 6.2: Instantiation of the Dicode suite of services (months 6-15 & 24-28, Leader: CTI, Participants: UOL, FHG, UPM, NEO). This task will prepare an instance of the Dicode suite of services for each use case, by performing the corresponding fine-tuning and following the scenarios of usage defined in WP2. The task is divided into two phases, corresponding to the initial and enhanced versions of the Dicode suite of services.
Description of work Task 6.3: Use case #1 - Clinico-Genomic Research Assimilator (months 10-36, Leader: BRF, Participants: UPM, CTI). The description of the case is given in Section 1.1.4 and in the Appendix (Sections A.1 and A.4). Task 6.4: Use case #2 - Trial of Rheumatoid Arthritis Treatment (months 10-36, Leader: IMA, Participants: UOL, CTI). The description of the case is given in Section 1.1.4 and in the Appendix (Sections A.2 and A.4). Task 6.5: Use case #3 – Opinion Mining from unstructured Web 2.0 data (months 10-36, Leader: PUB, Participants: NEO, FHG). The description of the case is given in Section 1.1.4 and in the Appendix (Sections A.3 and A.4).
Description of work Work to be done in the above three tasks concerns validation and assessment of the Dicode solutions against the metrics defined in Task 6.1. The overall evaluation framework ensures that the feedback to be provided to the development teams will be constructive, aiding the improvement of Dicode services towards increasing their usability, flexibility and acceptability. In particular cases, the assessment process will be assisted by external (not participating in the project) domain experts. Consultation from these experts – which may come from both academia and industry - is expected to reveal a more strategic and visionary point of view on the foreseen services.
Deliverables D6.1: The Dicode Evaluation Framework (m11). Describes the metrics and instruments to be designed in Task 6.1. Responsible: UOL. D6.2: Report from the evaluation of use case #1 (m18 and m32). Includes description of the case, information about the evaluation process for the particular case, and detailed evaluation feedback that also refers to the cost-effectiveness and readiness of the Dicode solutions for the market (the second version also comments on how the feedback provided in the first evaluation round was taken into account). Responsible: BRF. D6.3: Report from the evaluation of use case #2 (m18 and m32). Similar to D6.2. Responsible: IMA. D6.4: Report from the evaluation of use case #3 (m18 and m32). Similar to D6.2. Responsible: PUB. D6.5: Final Evaluation Report (m36). Summarizes the projects evaluation activities; it also includes assessment from experts/bodies that are not directly involved in the Dicode project. Responsible: BRF.
The Validation and Exploitation Committee Validation and Exploitation Committee (VEC): It is responsible for the overall coordination of the project evaluation, the promotion of relationships with other research groups and industry in Europe, and the development of links with potential end-users (beyond the three use cases) by identifying key applications. The objective of VEC is to ensure that innovative research performed in the context of Dicode will be thoroughly tested, so as to assess the feasibility of the foreseen outcomes, verify their long-term effects and derive further requirements and direction. The members of VEC are Sophia Kossida (BRF), Scott Robinson (NEO), Duncan Russell (IMA) and Ralf Löffler (PUB). VEC disseminates the Dicode suite of services and work methodologies to both industry and academia; it makes proposals to the Project Management Board and implements decisions regarding validation and exploitation matters that are made by the Project Management Board and the Steering Committee. The VEC meets every 2 months.
Our goal Decide on metrics and instruments Design and apply validation and assessment of the services DICODE evaluation and assessment framework
DICODE-FP7 Project WP6 - Validation & Assessment Thank you very much for your attention