DICODE-FP7 Project WP6 - Validation & Assessment.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Project kick-off meeting 6-7 September 2010 Berlin Grant Agreement n° Project Overview Overall objectives & approach Nikos Karacapilidis, CTI.
Advertisements

EXIOPOL Presentation March Presentation of the IP Agenda Introducing EXIOPOL –IP project –Objectives –Implementation plan –Structure.
WP4 – 4.1 and 4.2 Preparatory activities for the creation of the WATERMODE permanent network 1 Technical Committee Meeting Venice, June 24-25, 2010 VENETO.
This presentation arises from the project HEALTH EQUITY – 2020 which has received funding from the European Union, in the framework of the Health Programme.
1 NECOBELAC Project WORK PACKAGE 3 Cross-national advocacy infrastructure.
Introduction to the unit and mixed methods approaches to research Kerry Hood.
FORESTUR: “Tailored training for professionals in the rural tourist sector” ES/06/B/F/PP VALORISATION & SUSTAINIBILITY PLAN Budapest, June 2007.
RES-H Policy Background and Objectives of the Project 1. Project Meeting Freiburg, 21 October 2008 Veit Bürger
FPS HEALTH, FOOD CHAIN SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENT 1 Joint Action on Health Workforce Planning and Forecasting Zuzana Matlonova Brussels – April 11th, 2013.
Engaging Patients and Other Stakeholders in Clinical Research
E-OCVM (Version 2) Explained Episode 3 - CAATS II Final Dissemination Event Alistair Jackson EUROCONTROL Episode 3 Brussels, 13 & 14 Oct 2009.
ACCOUNTING INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Benchmarking as a management tool for continuous improvement in public services u Presentation to Ministry of Culture of the Russian Federation u Peter.
EEN [Canada] Forum Shelley Borys Director, Evaluation September 30, 2010 Developing Evaluation Capacity.
Iterative development and The Unified process
EVALUATION AND QUALITY ASSURANCE STRATEGY PRESENTED BY DR SHYAM PATIAR.
Page 1 Vienna, 03. June 2014 Mario Gavrić Croatian Bureau of Statistics Senior Adviser in Classification, Sampling, Statistical Methods and Analyses Department.
Leonardo da Vinci Project BLENDED LEARNING TRANSFER Rationalising, Learning and Transferring the use of technological platforms to enterprise-based learning.
PRESENTATION The Structured Dialogue. What? A participative process for young people and decision-makers to discuss and elaborate recommendations jointly.
Internal Auditing and Outsourcing
IWRM PLAN PREPARED AND APPROVED. CONTENT Writing an IWRM plan The content of a plan Ensuring political and public participation Timeframe Who writes the.
The Hungarian system of ex post and on-going evaluation focusing on Structural Funds Kinga Kenyeres, Evaluation Division6-7 May, 2010 National Development.
S/W Project Management
TEMPUS IV- THIRD CALL FOR PROPOSALS Recommendation on how to make a good proposal TEMPUS INFORMATION DAYS Podgorica, MONTENEGRO 18 th December 2009.
1 Framework Programme 7 Guide for Applicants
This project is implemented through the CENTRAL EUROPE Programme co-financed by the ERDF. Work Package 4 & Methodology for Open Living Lab O4.1.7 Budapest,
Atlanta Public Schools Project Management Framework Proposed to the Atlanta Board of Education to Complete AdvancED/SACS “Required Actions” January 24,
Demystifying the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge Central Iowa IIBA Chapter December 7, 2005.
The Audit Process Tahera Chaudry March Clinical audit A quality improvement process that seeks to improve patient care and outcomes through systematic.
INNOVATION 2004 Prague, Nov. 30/Dec.1-3, 2004 The EUREKA Initiative: Assessment and Evaluation Procedures Svatopluk Halada EUREKA Secretariat, Brussels.
PERIODIC ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMS AT UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL Office of the Provost Hélène David, associate vice-rector academic affairs Claude Mailhot, Professor.
WP1Transnational project and financial management Establishment-Operation of the Project Management and Implementation Instruments Region of Peloponnese.
Quality Management (WP5) Roman CHIRCA Agency for Innovation and Technological Transfer TecTNet ………... This project has been funded with support from the.
1 Women Entrepreneurs in Rural Tourism Evaluation Indicators Bristol, November 2010 RG EVANS ASSOCIATES November 2010.
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Statistical Division Part B of CMF: Metadata, Standards Concepts and Models Jana Meliskova UNECE Work Session.
PRESENTATION IV Cycle of the Structured Dialogue.
LEONARDO TRANSFER OF INNOVATION PROJECT “MEDIA TECH: The future of media industry using innovative technologies ” No. LLP-LdV-ToI-11-CY Kick-off.
WP8 – Innovation Support Kelly Vavasi General Secretariat for Research and Technology (GSRT) 1 st Innovation Dialogue Forum Becici, 8-9 November 2010.
DonQ – Air Project presentation. DonQ-Air – About project Objective: Objective: to encourage R&D activities in the aeronautic-related.
2nd Transnational Workshop 11th December Thessaloniki 1.
Proposals on standardisation process in ESS, The Hague_ ESS net Preparation of Standardisation 1 Proposals on standardisation process.
THE REGIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER for Central and Eastern Europe Integrated planning and Assessment of National Development Plan of the Czech Republic.
Business Analysis. Business Analysis Concepts Enterprise Analysis ► Identify business opportunities ► Understand the business strategy ► Identify Business.
Work Package 6 L2C Kick-off meeting Fontainebleau, March 7th 2006.
HELCOM HOLAS II ESA WS, Helsinki EU Horizon 2020 Coordination and support action Ville Karvinen / SYKE Enhancing ecosystem services mapping for.
1 Future Circular Collider Study Preparatory Collaboration Board Meeting September 2014 R-D Heuer Global Future Circular Collider (FCC) Study Goals and.
Guidelines Recommandations. Role Ideal mediator for bridging between research findings and actual clinical practice Ideal tool for professionals, managers,
Implementation recommendations 1st COPRAS review Presentation at 2nd COPRAS annual review, 15 March 2006, CEN/CENELEC meeting centre, Brussels Bart Brusse.
Project Management December 2008 Department of Planning and Follow-up (DPF) Secretary of Administration and Finance (SAF)
Presentation to the Ad-hoc Joint Sub-Committee on Parliamentary Oversight and Accountability Wednesday 20 March 2002 PUBLIC SERVICE MONITORING AND EVALUATION.
2050AP Project WP5: “Conclusions” UPM Madrid 11 de Octubre 2013.
Statistical process model Workshop in Ukraine October 2015 Karin Blix Quality coordinator
How to use C OBI T implementation resources Brian Selby Director of C OBI T Initiatives ISACA.
AUDIT STAFF TRAINING WORKSHOP 13 TH – 14 TH NOVEMBER 2014, HILTON HOTEL NAIROBI AUDIT PLANNING 1.
Capacity Building in: GEO Strategic Plan 2016 – 2025 and Work Programme 2016 Andiswa Mlisa GEO Secretariat Workshop on Capacity Building and Developing.
1MIL client logo to be positioned at the mark minimum height maximum size navigator Text Lines MIL Agenda.
Eastern European Partner countries
Funded by the Erasmus+ Programme EPP JO-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP Lina Tsakalou
Advances in Aligning Performance Data and Budget Information:
Statistics Governance and Quality Assurance: the Experience of FAO
ESS Vision 2020: ESS.VIP Validation
Evaluation plans for programming period in Poland
JARC General Assembly, Oct 16th, 2017
Strategic Plan Implementation July 18, 2018
Documentation Requirements of an IT Audit including Audit Management System (Area: Audit Process) A presentation by SAIs AFROSAI-E, Bangladesh, China,
EUPAN DG-Meeting Innovative Public Services Group (IPSG)
European Innovation Council
The Estonian experience with ex-ante evaluation – set-up and progress
Roles and Responsibilities
Presentation transcript:

DICODE-FP7 Project WP6 - Validation & Assessment

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 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 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 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