Full Descriptions for PhD Colloquium, Workshops, and Sessions

Ph.D. Student Colloquium

Chair: David Mendonça, mendonca@njit.edu, Information Systems Department, New Jersey Institute of TechnologyCo-chairs and past Ph.D. colloquium participants and awardees:Jonas Landgren, jonas.landgren@viktoria.se , Viktoria Institute, SwedenJiri Trnka, jirtr@ida.liu.se, Linköping University, Sweden

The Ph.D. Student Colloquium of the ISCRAM 2006 conference supports the goal of developing and sustaining a network of young scholars working in the area of Information Systems for crisis response and management. The one-day colloquium links current Ph.D. students to each other and to a range of senior researchers, enabling various types of interaction among them. It provides an opportunity for students to refine and focus their thesis research based on input from all colloquium participants.

The colloquium will be held at New Jersey Institute of Technology in Newark, New Jersey (USA) on 14 May 2006. The ISCRAM conference itself takes place from 13 to 17 May 2006.

Participation is via application only, and the number of participants is limited. Summary thesis proposals submitted as part of the application package will be the focus of discussions during the colloquium. The authors of the best three proposals will be given an opportunity to present their work to an audience of all ISCRAM attendees and to have abstracts of their work published in the ISCRAM proceedings.

The agenda of the colloquium is as follows:

1. PreliminariesPrior to the colloquium, the organizers make available to all participants (i) summaries of each student’s thesis work, (ii) a template for use in presenting their work to the colloquium and (iii) a photo roster of colloquium participants.

2. Introduction A welcome and a short introduction to the colloquium are given by the conference organizer and the colloquium organizers in order to provide a brief overview of the type of work that the PhD students are involved in. Students also briefly introduce themselves to the group as a whole.

1

3. Rapid PresentationsEach student provides a five- to seven-minute overview their proposed research.

4. Work Group DiscussionsParticipants, including faculty members, meet in groups of three to five to discuss and provide feedback on the proposed work. The primary goal of these discussions is to define and understand the relationships (commonalities and differences) in the various research projects, and thus to begin building a network of colleagues (i.e., a “virtual college”). The secondary goal is to provide useful feedback on the substance, organization, and conduct of the proposed work. To conclude, a representative from each group prepares a summary of the results of the discussion. The representatives then meet briefly to develop a consensus representation of the relationships among the various research projects.

5. Open PresentationsEach group representative gives a presentation on conclusions from the group discussion. These presentations are open to all conference participants. Summaries are then made available for comment and discussion during the social event.

6. Social EventThe social event—an informal gathering of all colloquium participants—is an opportunity to pursue some of the connections discovered or fostered during the group discussion. This is an excellent chance for participants to investigate another important dimension of their expanding community—interpersonal interaction.

Eligibility and How to ApplyParticipation in the colloquium is competitive and via application only. Eligible students are those who have completed at least a preliminary draft of their thesis proposal but have not yet defended their thesis. The application should include only the following materials:

A single PDF format file, emailed from the applicant, containing the following materials:

1. An abstract of less than 250 words describing the proposed research and its potential significance.

2. A statement of less than 250 words describing what the student hopes to contribute to and receive from participation in the colloquium.

2

3. A three- to five-page statement of the proposed thesis research. The statement should contain only in-text call-outs to tables and figures at the appropriate places (e.g., <<insert Table 1 here>>). The tables and figures themselves should be included in an Appendix, which should also list the references cited in the main body of the document.

4. A current curriculum vitae, clearly listing degrees, publications and any other pertinent information.

5. A digital photo for inclusion in the colloquium photo roster.

Note on preparation: The general ISCRAM submission guidelines should be followed, with the following changes: format in Times 12pt font, single-spaced, for printing on US letter-sized paper (8.5in by 11in). Detailed guidelines on paper formatting and preparation are available at http://www.iscram.org. (If it is not possible to send a single PDF file, a single ZIP file containing the application materials may be submitted.)

A single PDF or MS Word format file, emailed from the applicant’s advisor, which

6. States that the student has at least written an acceptable draft of the full thesis proposal. The letter should also address the potential significance of the proposed work in the area of Information Systems for crisis response and management.

Both documents should be sent before 1 February 2006 to iscram06phd@njit.edu. Any questions can be sent to the chair and co-chairs at this same address.

Full Workshop Descriptions

Emergency Management Information Systems: Future needs and requirements

Chair: Paul Burghardt; paul.burghardt@decis.nl Research Manager at Delft Consortium on Intelligent Systems, Netherlands

The purpose of this workshop is to establish a common vision on future requirements on information systems for crisis response and management. Practitioners are invited to submit a position paper based on their experience in real world crisis situations. Researchers

3

are encouraged to draw conclusions from their academic work in terms of future needs and requirements.

Beyond any doubt, recent crises have shown that systems for crisis response and management are in need of significant improvements. It is often pointed out that the communication and information systems were not prepared to deal with such unanticipated situations. This workshop aims to make use of the expertise of the ISCRAM community to articulate the priority requirements that should be placed on the information systems of the future. Both practitioners and researchers are invited to submit a short position paper in which they make use of their particular experience and expertise.

The workshop is intended to complement the specials sessions by offering an opportunity for discussion crosscutting all special concerns. Specific position papers may for example be concerned with requirements on information systems with regard to:

Estimating the scale of upcoming crises and response it necessitates

Establishing the window of opportunity for a timely response Enabling communications between multiple layers and

disciplines Coordinating actions of multiple communities/stakeholders Workflow Management for Incident Command Systems Enabling knowledge management and reach-back processes Involvement of civilians (Public Warning, Information and

Engagement) Enhancing the ease of use and trustworthiness of supporting

applications Improvement of the interoperability of systems through

standardization Extending personalized support of field workers

By means of a Delphi-like process the participants will be encouraged to arrive at a common vision on priority requirements that will be presented in the general ISCRAM conference. A publication will follow acknowledging the contributions to the workshop. Note that the workshop is primarily concerned with the actual requirements. There is also a Special session on Multi-Disciplinary requirements Capture for Emergency Information Systems that focuses on the research and engineering methods by which requirements are captured.

Future Communication Requirements for Emergency Response

4

Co-Chairs:Alexandra Hubenko Baker, ahubenko@ucsd.edu B. S. Manoj, bsmanoj@ucsd.edu UCSD CalIT2, University of California at San Diego www.itr-rescue.org and www.responsphere.org

Workshop Review Committee:Prof. Ramesh Rao, University of California, San Diego, USAProf. Sharad Mehrotra, University of California, Irvine, USAProf. Bhaskar Rao, University of California San Diego, USAProf. Nalini Venkatasubramanian, University of California Irvine, USAProf. Carter Butts, University of California Irvine, USA

The focus theme of this workshop is the future communication requirements for emergency response. This workshop provides a forum for researchers and practitioners to present their experiences and expectations from the existing and future communications systems, respectively. The position papers presented by the authors will be used for drafting a white paper at the end of the workshop, which will form an important document for providing guidance to the policy makers.

Authors are invited to submit position papers (three to five pages single spaced) in related areas that will be reviewed by the review committee and accepted for presentation at the workshop. Research areas of particular interest are (a) social communication issues on before, during, and after a crisis, (b) communication network issues during and after a crisis, and (c) the influence of (a) on (b). Monitoring the communication pattern can help developing an early warning system about impending crisis. We invite researchers, practitioners, students, and academicians to submit their high quality position papers to this workshop. Each accepted position paper must be presented at the workshop and a final white paper will be brought out from the workshop. Position papers on the topics including but not limited to the following topics are invited to be submitted to this workshop.

Future requirements of communication systems for emergency response

Role of the government and policy makers Role of the emergency response agencies Human communication behavior modeling in emergency

situations Identification of human behavior patterns for early detection of

network emergencies

5

Group communication challenges in inter-response agency communications

Technological challenges in inter-response agency communication

Effect on human communication during crises on communication networks

Emergency networking Use of IT in emergency communication Ad hoc wireless networking Wireless mesh networking Extreme networking for ground zero communication Heterogeneous wireless networks for emergency response Location detection, traffic prediction, and their impact on

communication infrastructure Reliability and fault tolerance of communication infrastructure Manageability of cellular infrastructure on the aftermath of large

scale disasters Design of wireless networks for emergency handling Fault tolerance and recovery in wireless systems Intelligent wireless messaging system for aiding crises handling Automated crises management systems for next generation

wireless networks Studies on the impact of crises or emergency situations to

wireless network crises Data gathering, analysis, and utilization of information to aid

crises mitigation in next generation wireless networks Design of distributed wireless network control centers for aiding

emergency situation handling Simulation test-bed and related studies for crises mitigation Experimental results on solutions for wireless network centric

crises mitigation Human communication behavior modeling to prevent impending

wireless network emergencies Protocol design for implicit emergency response in next

generation wireless networks

Authors should submit an electronic version of the position paper in word format. Authors must identify that they are submitting papers for the workshop titled ``Future Communication Requirements for Emergency Response". All submissions will undergo a thorough review by the review committee. Each accepted position papers must be presented at the workshop and a final white paper will be brought out from the workshop.

6

Providing Assurance by Auditing Emergency Preparedness: Role of the auditor

Review Committee:Chair: Murray Turoff, turoff@njit.edu Michael Chumer, chumer@njit.edu Information Systems DepartmentNew Jersey Institute of TechnologyCo-Chair: Michael Alles, alles@business.rutgers.edu Alexander Kogan, kogan@andromeda.rutgers.edu Miklos Vasarhelyi miklosv@andromeda.rurgters.edu Donald Warren, jdonwarren@rbs.rutgers.edu Accounting and Information Systems, Rutgers Business SchoolRutgers UniversityTrony Clifton: CPA, CISA, CFSA, trony@mandem.com, Educational Chair, NJ Chapter Information Systems Audit, and Control AssociationB. Elisabeth Rossen, brossen@fau.edu, Executive Forensic Accounting Program, Florida Atlantic University

This workshop is based upon the following published paper:

Turoff, M., M. Chumer, R. Hiltz, R. Klashner, M. Alles, M. Vasarhelyi, and A. Kogan, “Assuring Homeland Security: Continuous Monitoring, Control & Assurance of Emergency Preparedness,” Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 6:3, 2004, 1-24. http://jitta.org A copy may be obtained from turoff@njit.edu.

The recent controversy over the inadequacy of governments and systems to deal with Cyclone’s Katerina and Rita despite years of preparation illustrate that EP systems may not always work as expected. Establishing a reliable and credible state of emergency preparedness (EP) requires an audit capability that provides decision makers and first responders with assurance as to the actual capabilities of an EP system. “EP Trust” is a set of controls and criteria that auditors can use to measure the degree of EP of organizations of all types: commercial, governmental at the federal, state, and local levels, medical and care facilities, volunteer organizations, and non profits. The audit of EP systems is a clear gap in Homeland Security and an essential element in ensuring that the lessons learned from 9/11 and Hurricane Katerina have a permanent impact on preparations for future emergencies. The development of the measures and controls that would comprise EP Trust requires a highly interdisciplinary process, with the necessary involvement of professionals in EP, the audit profession, the IT community, experts, including academics, from management science, operations research,

7

accounting and organizational behavior, as well as first responders and others on the front line of EP.

The objective of this workshop is to come up with a road map on what is necessary to proceed to making this type of auditing a reality. Underlying this goal is the observation that some of the same implications that exist under the Sarbanes Oxley Act for the design of controls over financial reporting are also necessary for Emergency Preparedness Information Systems in terms of the monitoring of real time decision process within the organization.

For the workshop we are requesting participants to submit a 3-5 single spaced working position paper on their views of the proposal for an EP Trust capability and how it can be brought to realization. Our objective is to achieve a true interdisciplinary mix of 20-30 participants. The position papers will be due at the same time other papers are due for ISCRAM. Those papers accepted will be placed on a bulletin board at NJIT for review and comment by the workshop participants. As a result of this and the actual workshop on the Sunday of the 14th of May at NJIT, a subcommittee will be chosen to compile a report on the conclusions arrived at by the participants that will ultimately be published on the ISCRAM website, along with the final versions of the working papers and a follow on journal publication. A summary of what occurred will also be presented at the ISCRAM meeting during the next three days.

Forecasting, Risk Assessment, and decision support systems for large scale evacuations

Chair: Rene Windhouwer, rene@windhouwer.demon.nl Co-Chair: Bartel Van de Walle, bartel@uvt.nl

Tsunamis, floods, hurricanes are natural disasters that have one thing in common. A reliable forecast creates a certain warning time that can be used for a large scale evacuation to prevent or reduce the number of casualties. The main objective of the workshop is to answer the question how we can use decision support systems to improve the emergency management in general and evacuation management more specific, so that we can use the warning time optimally. The workshop tries to close the gap between policy makers, scientist, and practitioners. Searches for the needs and requirements that have to be met, obstructions that have to be overcome and what could be done to improve the current gap between planning and execution in the area of large scale evacuations.

8

There will be a chance for review and online discussion of the position papers by the members of a workshop prior to the meeting. Following the face-to-face workshop, a volunteer subgroup will develop a report based upon the final views generated at the workshop. This report will be published on the ISCRAM website and a journal outlet will be sought. Final position papers by individual participants will be published on the ISCRAM website (with permission of the individual authors) after the workshops along with the collaborative report of the participants in the workshop. A summary will be presented during the main ISCRAM meeting by the workshop chair.

Full Session Descriptions

Audit activities and functions in Emergency Preparedness

Chair: Elisa Rossen, elisabr@ifi.uio.no Executive Masters Forensic Accounting Program, Florida Atlantic UniversityCo-Chair: Michael Alles, alles@business.rutgers.edu Donald Warren, jdonwarren@rbs.rutgers.edu Accounting and Information Systems, Rutgers Business SchoolRutgers University

This session addresses: how do auditors approach the daunting task of assuring the preparedness and use of information systems in any or all phases of the “Lifecycle of Emergency Preparedness and Response" (planning, training, mitigation, detection, alerting, response, recovery and assessment).

Topics of Particular Interest for Papers:

Defining Auditor’s Role in Emergency Preparedness Risk Assessment by Auditor’s for Emergency Preparedness Internal Controls by Auditor’s for Emergency Preparedness Opportunities for Auditors in All Phases of Emergency Preparedness Action Learning for Auditor’s in Optimizing the Use of IS in

Emergency Preparedness Improved planning, risk analysis, damage assessment, and recovery

analysis Tracking and assessing organizational decision processes Future Research Programs to Enhance Auditor’s Role in Emergency

Preparedness

9

Practitioner’s cases; Learning Community Reports; Research in Progress, Conceptual Papers and Completed Papers are invited for submission. Authors are welcome to contact the session chairs early on with questions and for feedback on abstracts.

Communication Challenges in Emergency Response

Chair: B. S. Manoj (bsmanoj@ucsd.edu)Co-Chair: Alexandra Hubenko Baker (ahubenko@ucsd.edu)UCSD Calit2University of California www.itr-rescue.org and www.responsphere.org

Session Steering Committee:Prof. Ramesh Rao, University of California San Diego, USAProf. Sharad Mehrotra, University of California Irvine, USAProf. Bhaskar Rao, University of California San Diego, USAProf. Nalini Venkatasubramanian, University of California Irvine, USAProf. Carter Butts, University of California Irvine, USA

In every emergency situation, the response actions are aggravated by a chaotic communication scenario. There are two critical elements to this communication chaos. The first is the human communication behavior in emergency scenario; the second is the design of the communication networks that are generally designed for peace time traffic. It has become imperative to study the behavior of people and networks as far as communication scenarios in an emergency situation are concerned. The focus theme of this special session is the communication challenges in emergency response. In this session, we focus on two major areas: Social communication issues and Communication Technology Issues. These two are so inter-related that we cannot separate them from any realistic study. For example; any real world emergency could lead to a network emergency or, in other words, the failure of communication networks could lead to real world emergencies.

This special session focuses on needs and challenges faced by communication systems during emergency response activities and the social issues surrounding it. Research areas of particular interest are (a) social communication issues on before, during, and after a crisis, (b) communication network issues during and after a crisis, and (c) the influence of (a) on (b). Monitoring the communication pattern can help developing an early warning system about impending crisis. We invite researchers, practitioners, students, and academicians to submit their high quality research papers to this special session. This special

10

session accepts papers on the topics including but not limited to the following topics.

Human communication behavior modeling in emergency situations

Identification of human behavior patterns for early detection of network emergencies

Group communication challenges in inter-response agency communications

Technological challenges in inter-response agency communication

Effect on human communication during crises on communication networks

Emergency networking Use of IT in emergency communication Ad hoc wireless networking Wireless mesh networking Extreme networking for ground zero communication Heterogeneous wireless networks for emergency response Location detection, traffic prediction, and their impact on

communication infrastructure Reliability and fault tolerance of communication infrastructure Manageability of cellular infrastructure on the aftermath of large

scale disasters Design of wireless networks for emergency handling Fault tolerance and recovery in wireless systems Intelligent wireless messaging system for aiding crises handling Automated crises management systems for next generation

wireless networks Studies on the impact of crises or emergency situations to

wireless network crises Data gathering, analysis, and utilization of information to aid

crises mitigation in next generation wireless networks Design of distributed wireless network control centers for aiding

emergency situation handling Simulation test-bed and related studies for crises mitigation Experimental results on solutions for wireless network centric

crises mitigation Human communication behavior modeling to prevent impending

wireless network emergencies Protocol design for implicit emergency response in next

generation wireless networks

Communities in Emergency Management

11

Chair: Wendy Schafer was15@psu.edu]Pennsylvania State University

Emergency management activities can be perceived in a number of different ways. An especially robust viewpoint is that emergency management is a community-based activity. In this view, all phases of the emergency management cycle, planning, preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation, might involve a significant community effort. Emergency situations, including potential and actual situations, are addressed through a coalescence of ideas, manpower, and physical resources.

Emergencies are known to strike geographic areas and the local first responders are always on the front lines. These firemen, police officers, hazardous material experts, emergency medical services technicians, and so on belong to the local geographic community and they belong to an emergency management community. As part of the civic sector, they participate in a local squad, team, company or a district. They are part of an organization providing fire protection, police services, emergency medicine, etc. On another level, they work with emergency management coordinators, local schools, transportation centers, and charitable agencies to handle wide-area events. Working in a multi-agency context, these people come together to form an emergency management community focused on a coordination of efforts.

The purpose of this session is to explore the idea of emergency management as a community activity, discuss the implications for technology design, and reflect on technological innovations that support community-based interactions. The concept of community is broadly defined and includes geographic communities, single agency communities, multi-agency communities, communities of emergency managers, and online communities. Submissions are invited that address the community aspects of emergency management work, including but not limited to the following topics:

Theoretical perspectives on geographic communities and emergency management

Theoretical perspectives on emergency management communities

Case studies of community-based practices Technologies that facilitate emergency management

communities Organizational designs and activities that foster emergency

management communities

12

Communication and collaboration resources for emergency management communities

Emergency notification and awareness designs for geographic communities

Theoretical perspectives on volunteers and volunteer organizations

Case studies of volunteers and volunteer organizations

Comparing Military and Civil Information Systems for Emergency Preparedness and Response

Chair: Tim Grant TJ.Grant@mindef.nlProfessor Operational ICT & CommunicationsNetherlands Defense Academy (NLDA)

Information systems (ISs) for emergency preparedness and response are found in both civil and military fields. In the past, the civil and military IS communities have been largely isolated from one another.

There are now several compelling reasons why civil and military ISs for preparedness and response should be compared with one another. A scientific reason is that comparison will almost certainly demonstrate that – despite different terminologies and operating philosophies – many of the underlying concepts, processes, architectures, and technologies have much in common. Discovering such commonalities increases the sum of scientific knowledge. An operational reason is that preparedness and response to civil emergencies may well require close collaboration with the military, as on September 11, 2001, and more recently with Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The reverse is also true, as when military humanitarian and nation-building operations require military ISs to monitor and control civil assets like electricity, water, telecommunications, and petrochemical installations and networks. A commercial reason is that the development of COTS products that can serve both civil and military IS needs increases the size of the market, spreads cost and risk, increases product reliability, and enhances interoperability between users.

The special session solicits submissions that compare, contrast, and cross-benchmark civil and military ISs, that proposes a model or methodology for comparison, or that describes a civil or military IS so as to facilitate comparison and benchmarking. Submissions may address the complete lifecycle of emergency preparedness and response or part of that lifecycle. Example submissions include (but are not limited to):

13

Full papers presenting common concepts, processes, and architectures or comparison models or methodologies;

Reports on research in progress on common concepts, processes, and architectures or comparison models or methodologies;

Practitioner cases on comparing or interoperating civil and military ISs.

Creating and using the window of opportunity

Chair: Rene Windhouwer, rene@windhouwer.demon.nl]

The conference theme of the ISCRAM 2006 is the continuous parallel between preparedness and response. Most of de IS are primary designed for the response phase (situational awareness, DSS, etc.), but they can also be of great help in the preparedness and mitigation phases.

A very good example is that some hazards have a certain warning time, this means that there a timeframe between the alarm and the disaster. In the recent history we have seen that emergency managers were not aware of the fact that there is a certain warning time (window of opportunity) or did not use it properly. A recent example is the hurricane Katrina where the city of New Orleans did not evacuate those who rely upon the government or gave them shelter in a stadium that was prepared for this task.

Another example is that simulations can give us information of how the disaster will develop in time. Inundation simulations of parts of the Province of Zeeland shown that a major evacuation routes was flooded within Five hours after the dike burst. This led to the conclusion that an evacuation has to be preventive. Evacuations themselves are a major challenge for effective use of windows of opportunity.

Both examples show that it is very important to asses the hazards in de preparedness phase. But what methodologies can be used for assessing the risks and how could those risks be mapped. What role could those maps play in the risk and crisis communication?

The special paper session seeks to explore the following questions:

1. Which methodologies can we use to asses the (multi)risk in a certain area?

2. Can those methodologies create a certain warning that can be used in the response phase to reduce the risk and consequences of the disaster?

14

3. How could the risks be mapped and what role can the maps play in the risk and crisis communication, training and exercising of the emergency managers?

4. What role can Decision Support Systems play by using the window of opportunity

Emergency Response Reachback: Cases, Concepts, Processes, and Tools

Chair: Steven R. Haynes, shaynes@ist.psu,edu, Assistant ProfessorJohn M. Carroll, jcarroll@ist.psu,edu, Edward M. Frymoyer Chair Steve Sawyer, sawyer@ist.psu,edu, Associate ProfessorSchool of Information Sciences & Technology, Penn State University

Reachback refers to knowledge-intensive processes and tools that make available to emergency response personnel in the field the full range and depth of an organization’s knowledge assets. For example, a firefighter on-scene at a fire may want to call on the knowledge of all other firefighters at their station, who in turn might need to reach back to subject matter experts (e.g., for hazardous materials) at other stations in the city, or to other state or federal organizations. This session will explore theories, models, techniques, and tools to inform development of a reachback science for emergency management and crisis response.

Reachback is a type of knowledge management particularly concerned with how distributed assets can be leveraged in response to a critical information need. Emergency responders “reachback” to obtain the information they need to make time-critical and potentially consequential decisions as events unfold during crisis response. Reachback is especially important when emergencies involve hazardous materials, weapons of mass destruction, and other situations that require in-depth, time-sensitive, and specialist knowledge to manage effectively. The reachback domain presents opportunities to develop and leverage synergies between information and communications technologies and distributed organizations.

A number of tools and underlying technologies are used to support reachback. These range from standard helpdesk and technical support systems to expertise locators and advanced knowledge mapping representations. Other relevant technologies include but are not limited to: computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW), information retrieval and collaborative filtering, geographical information systems

15

(GIS), expert systems and intelligent agents, knowledge representation, knowledge tailoring, among many others.

This session is concerned with helping to define and delineate the reachback field. Submissions are invited that address issues informing the reachback domain including but not limited to the following topics:

Theoretical perspectives informing reachback practices and technology design for emergency management

Technologies to facilitate effective reachback in emergency response organizations

Knowledge mapping for emergency planning and response: concepts, techniques, and tools

Expertise location in crisis situations Empirical studies of emergency management reachback

technology and process Case studies in reachback Design of emergency management organizations to facilitate

effective reachback Information tailoring in crisis situations Large-scale reachback models and tools for crisis events of

national significance

Exploring Knowledge Management in Crisis Response

Chair: Murray E. Jennex, Ph.D, P.E., CISSP, mjennex@mail.sdsu.edu San Diego State University, Editor in Chief, International Journal of Knowledge Management

There is much discussion on using knowledge in crisis response decision support. This session defines crisis knowledge as experience from previous responses to crisis with subsequent analysis as to the effectiveness and appropriateness of those responses. This session will solicit papers that explore the use of Knowledge Management techniques to manage this knowledge and bring it to bear during crisis response to aid decision makers in determining appropriate courses of action. Some expected topics include incorporating KM into crisis response DSS, determining when knowledge is appropriate for a situation, visualizing knowledge, storage of knowledge for search and retrieval, and cases describing experience in incorporating KM into crisis response. Quality papers from this session(s) would be fast tracked for publication in the International Journal of Knowledge Management.

16

Human factors aspects in multi-agency crisis management

Chair: Elizabeth Carver, liz.carver@baesystems.com Executive Scientist, Advanced Technology CentreBAE Systems, Bristol, UK

It is acknowledged that technological advances have made a great impact in areas such as IT infrastructure, data sharing capabilities, and the development of tools for data analysis and decision making support in crisis management scenarios. However, in some cases the planned benefits do not seem as great as was originally predicted. Often the people-centered aspects are not sufficiently addressed to allow the people and technologies to work together and with each other, with the people forming an integral part of the system. It is only by doing this that the whole system can reap the potentially great benefits. There is a requirement to better understand the more people-centered aspects that affect the collaboration of different organizations to achieve successful outcomes in crisis and emergency situations.

The top level goal for human centered information systems is to ensure that the right information, in an understandable format gets to the person who needs to know it and who can recognize its value, in time for the right action to be taken.

This session will aim to better understand the social, organizational, and cognitive aspects of crisis and emergency management and to identify the barriers and enablers with respect to technology, process, and people.

Papers are welcomed on:

Experiences in getting different agencies to talk to each other, as well as the operational difficulties encountered

Collaboration and shared understanding within and between crisis management teams.

Cultural differences between groups which have an impact on understanding

Situation awareness at both ground level and at command level Shared awareness of the situation - by relevant stakeholders Collaborative planning Social network analysis in crisis scenarios Taxonomies of information types Visualization of information for greater understanding by users –

including display design de-cluttering, filtering, information extraction

17

Problems and concerns, experiences

and good practice within and between crisis management

teams

Toolset development -both technological and non-technological

To support training

solutions

To direct research

Understanding of the differences between agencies in terms working culture, organisational

structures, language, processes and

resources

Knowledge and information flows

Knowledge sharing - who needs what, when, and in what format?

Degree of shared

awareness

Human aspects in multi-agency crisis and incident management

Story telling

After action reviews

Learning histories

Lessons learned

Cross agency similarities and

differences

Organisational Psychology and crew resource management

Current Good practice

Task and process analysis

Problems and concerns, experiences

and good practice within and between crisis management

teams

Problems and concerns, experiences

and good practice within and between crisis management

teams

Toolset development -both technological and non-technological

To support training

solutions

To direct research

Understanding of the differences between agencies in terms working culture, organisational

structures, language, processes and

resources

Knowledge and information flows

Knowledge sharing - who needs what, when, and in what format?

Degree of shared

awareness

Human aspects in multi-agency crisis and incident management

Story telling

After action reviews

Learning histories

Lessons learned

Cross agency similarities and

differences

Organisational Psychology and crew resource management

Current Good practice

Task and process analysis

Toolset development -both technological and non-technological

To support training

solutions

Toolset development -both technological and non-technological

To support training

solutions

To direct researchTo direct research

Understanding of the differences between agencies in terms working culture, organisational

structures, language, processes and

resources

Knowledge and information flows

Knowledge sharing - who needs what, when, and in what format?

Degree of shared

awareness

Human aspects in multi-agency crisis and incident management

Story telling

After action reviews

Learning histories

Lessons learned

Cross agency similarities and

differences

Organisational Psychology and crew resource management

Current Good practice

Task and process analysis

Understanding of the differences between agencies in terms working culture, organisational

structures, language, processes and

resources

Knowledge and information flows

Knowledge sharing - who needs what, when, and in what format?

Degree of shared

awareness Understanding of the differences between agencies in terms working culture, organisational

structures, language, processes and

resources

Knowledge and information flows

Knowledge sharing - who needs what, when, and in what format?

Degree of shared

awareness

Human aspects in multi-agency crisis and incident management

Story telling

After action reviews

Learning histories

Lessons learned

Cross agency similarities and

differences

Organisational Psychology and crew resource management

Current Good practice

Task and process analysis

Human aspects in multi-agency crisis and incident management

Story telling

After action reviews

Learning histories

Lessons learned

Cross agency similarities and

differences

Organisational Psychology and crew resource management

Current Good practice

Task and process analysis

Story telling

After action reviews

Learning histories

Lessons learned

Cross agency similarities and

differences

Organisational Psychology and crew resource management

Current Good practice

Task and process analysis

Information overload Use of technologies to enhance communication and/or transfer of

information from HQ to people at the coal face (what needs to be transferred )

Transferring intent from Gold command Human factors aspects of communication in heterogeneous

environments Case studies of HF evaluation trials in real or experimental

environments User requirements capture Decision support Awareness of the public about what is happening Responses of the public to warnings Impacts of media (TV, internet) Impacts of mobile phones Lessons learned, use cases, current available knowledge bases

and current experience Practical guidance for storing information in databases of

experience as well as success in re-using it Cross domain training and learning Definition of human-centered requirements for training, as well

as for support and analysis tools

We need to work towards a level playing field taking into account differences in crisis domain, national differences, cognizance of the lowest common denominator, and potential difficulties in cross border collaboration in order to build better crisis and response management systems.

18

Incident Command Systems Workflow Management

Chair: Allen Milewski, amilewsk@monmouth.edu Co-chair: Jiacun Wang, jwang@monmouth.edu Department of Software EngineeringCenter for Rapid Response Database SystemsMonmouth University, NJ

The research on workflow modeling and validation has been around for a couple of decades, and many approaches and tools have been developed and gained certain range of practical applications. However, most workflows do not allow one to modify a process model (e.g. to react to external events) once it has started executing. On the other hand, the increased dynamic nature of business rules in today’s market have drawn more and more attention from the research society. This flexibility becomes of paramount importance in applications such as an incident command systems (ICS), which is designed to respond to terror attacks or natural disasters. An ICS would have to deal with frequent changes in the course of actions dictated by incoming events, a predominantly volunteer-based workforce, the need to integrate various software tools and organizations, and a highly distributed workflow management. The need of making ad-hoc changes also calls for an on-the-fly verification of the correctness of the modified workflow. The fact that main users of ICS will be volunteers from various backgrounds also raises a demand for tools with highly intuitive features for the description and modification of the workflows.

As workflow systems currently provide little support for such challenges, the goal of this special session is to provide researchers with an opportunity to discuss how workflow systems can better deal with these issues. We expect to draw together and help identify the breadth of current work, commonalities, gaps, potential collaborations, and future research directions for workflow specifically as it relates to ICS at the application level. Relevant topics include but are not limit to:

Dynamic workflow modeling and verification Infrastructures for dynamically modifiable process models Inter-organizational dynamic workflows

19

Formal methods in dynamic workflows Methodologies for ICS workflow management Tool development and integration Notification and alerting of external events Automatic event-driven workflow modification ICS workflow case study ICS process patterns ICS process visualization ICS process simulation Usability design and evaluation

All submissions must indicate that they are targeted to the “Incident Command Systems Workflow Management” session and be emailed to iscram06@njit.edu.

Information, Communication, and Coordination Issues from Hurricane Katrina

Chair: John R. Harrald, jharrald@gwu.edu Director, George Washington Institute for Crisis Disaster and Risk Management

Information management problems and the failure of critical communication infrastructure crippled the early response efforts to Hurricane Katrina resulting in increased human suffering and economic loss. The objective of this session is to describe the most significant of these issues, identify the factors that caused the failures, and identify the impacts on organizational decision making and performance. Papers are solicited that describe technological issues (e.g. the total collapse of emergency communications), information management issues (e.g. the handling of information within and transferring information between EOCs), and the use of technology in organizational and individual decision support. Papers on information, Coordination, and Communication issues in any of the recent Hurricanes in 2005 will be considered as well, especially where they identify reoccurring issues across the different events. Papers based on empirical observation are particularly encouraged. The session will be chaired by Dr. John R. Harrald who is a member of the National Research Council’s Committee on Using Information Technology to Enhance Disaster Management.

Mobile and multi-channel emergency announcement (MEA/MCEA) systems

20

Chair: Ronja Addams-Moring, ronja.addams-moring@tkk.fihttp://www.tml.tkk.fi/~ronja/

In concordance with the international Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM) community's conference theme of information systems for the “Lifecycle of Emergency Preparedness and Response” (Planning, Training, Mitigation, Detection, Alerting, Response, Recovery, and Assessment), we issue a call for papers concerning mobile emergency announcements (MEA) systems, and the related multi-channel emergency announcements (MCEA) systems.

In any civil defense situation, such as a fire at a shopping centre, a multiple-car pileup on a freeway in foggy weather, the aftermath of a severe storm or the preparations before a radioactive fallout cloud arrives, the general public needs to know what they should and should not do. Therefore, the authorities need reliable systems for sending emergency announcements (EA) (also called “public warning”) to the affected population. Additionally, an EA that gets corrupted during sending may cause fatal misunderstandings and thus do great harm. So sufficient reliability under abnormal conditions is one central requirement when we choose, which technology or technologies to use for sending emergency announcements. This special session addresses these challenges.

The concepts MEA and MCEA refer to emergency announcements that are

sent by an authority or a representative for many authorities, to the general public (or a subgroup thereof), who are in an afflicted or threatened area;

o in case of a MEA, using different types of mobile devices that people routinely carry with them (mobile phones, PDAs, laptops connected to WLANs in Internet cafés, etc.);

o in case of a MCEA, using multiple channels, often including a MEA channel.

The MEA/MCEA content can be, for example: early warning, incident information, and evacuation route description or protection guidance. Although a MEA/MCEA system or system part is usually designed for a certain geographic, language or cultural area, many features of these systems are also generalizable.

The research issues of interest include, for example: usable technologies for MEA systems (use case or usability

evaluations)

21

integrating new MEA systems with the existing EA systems (how to create reliable MCEA systems)

solutions to the challenges of locating and identifying survivors (including reconciling different legal frameworks for safety and privacy issues)

how to provide efficient feedback channels for survivors when networks are congested, damaged or both

rapid re-establishing of mobile communications networks during or directly after an emergency (to e.g. facilitate MEAs)

challenges concerning the understandability of MEA and MCEA content (especially in multi-lingual environments)

end user acceptance of MEAs and MCEAs coordinating MEAs or MCEAs from different authorities, and MEA and MCEA related security issues, especially how to prevent

false or faked emergency announcements.

Modeling and Computer Simulation of Disaster Plans and Emergency Response

Chair: Maria Santos <masantos@lnec.pt>Maria Alzira Santos Laboratório Nacional de Engenharia CivilDepartamento de Hidráulica Núcleo de Tecnologias de Informação

Natural or man-induced hazards as floods, landslides, volcanoes, tsunamis or dam breaks, may have severe consequences and may extend for large areas. To cope with such a disaster that involves a large number of stakeholders requires a holistic approach and an efficient management, which is highly dependent on the timely access to relevant information, on adequate planning and on the response of the main stakeholders. This efficient response calls for adequate participation, coordinated interactions and some improvisation of the various players that can only be obtained through training.

Since most of the more catastrophic disasters are of low frequency, training based on field experience is not possible. Testing a disaster plan, with the evaluation of the available means and the pre-definition of procedures or the preparedness of the defense personnel, is possible only through computational simulation where disaster scenarios can be created and actors’ roles can be associated with individual agents in simulation.

An emergency response simulation with the required functionalities is a cost-effective means of scenario creation and of personnel training. It allows creating scenarios of destruction, triggering alerts and

22

simulating a dynamic coordination of a multi-disciplinary community, saving lives and protecting property.

Several information systems and agent-based simulation applications in emergency management have been developed in recent years. Other ICT tools, such as 3-D visualization, social network representation, location-based systems, geographic information systems, information lens techniques, may contribute to improve the simulation of dynamic spatial phenomena.

Papers to be submitted must focus on emergency response modeling and computer simulation and personnel training. Case studies are welcome. Topics to be addressed may include:

agent-based simulation and other knowledge-based methods; theory of modeling and simulation applied to emergency

response; synthetic environments; collaborative work; decision analysis; Game-based frameworks for emergency response simulation.

Multiagent Systems for Disaster Management and Response

Chair: Dr. Frank Fiedrich, fiedrich@gwu.edu Institute for Crisis, Disaster, and Risk Management, the George Washington Universityhttp://www.gwu.edu/~icdrm/People/fiedrich.htm Co-chair:Drs. Paul Burghardt, paul.burghardt@decis.nl Decis Lab, Delft, The Netherlandshttp://www.decis.nl/html/paul_burghardt.htm

Multiagent Systems (MAS) are computational systems where software agents (e.g. independent software programs) cooperate or compete with each other to achieve an individual or collective task. These systems are currently receiving increasing attention in diverse applications for complex and dynamic environments. The management of and the response to natural and technological disasters is an emergent research area and the complexity of these devastating events suggests the use of such adaptive realtime technologies.

23

This special session will focus on the potential of agent technology for disaster management and response. The session will address the following questions:

What is the potential of MAS for emergency and disaster management and what are the IS requirements for the use of agent technology at various domain levels?

What kind of architectures, frameworks and models do support this approach?

Which formal models can be used for agent-based real-time planning and automatic information retrieval?

How can agent-based simulation systems be used to simulate the consequences of response activities and how can the results be validated?

How can agents be linked to human decision makers in order to be accepted?

Although the main focus of this session explores the potential of MAS, the session also welcomes contributions focusing on potential problems and risks associated with the use of this technology.

We seek original and high-quality contributions on the general theme of Multiagent Systems for Disaster Management and Response. The following is a non-exhaustive list with topics of special interest:

Unique frameworks and architectures for agent-based decision support systems for natural and man-made disasters

Models for agent-based real-time operations planning and resource allocation

Dynamic goal and plan creation with uncertain and conflicting information

Co-ordination, communication and collaborative planning in large-scale multiagent systems

Information retrieval agents for disaster related real time information systems

Agent-based modeling of self organizing systems and emergent organizations for disaster response

Security issues in agent-based systems for time critical missions Human-Agent interfaces Ontologies and communication standards Agent-based simulation systems

Multi-disciplinary requirements capture for ISCRAM

Chair: Paul Burghardt, Paul.Burghardt@DECIS.nl

24

Research Manager at Delft Consortium on Intelligent Systems, Netherlands

The purpose of this session is to present efficient and effective ways to capture requirements in research and development projects that have limited resources to do so.

Many R&D projects in the field of information systems for crisis response and management are confronted with the need to capture requirements. The initial proposal-time vision on the crisis management and response organizations for which the information technology will be developed is often not specific enough. The need arises to acquire in depth knowledge of the domain and to refine the requirements. This work is often complicated by the fact that multiple stakeholders must be considered while the project resources to do so are very limited. Such technology oriented projects could greatly benefit from efficient and yet effective methods to capture requirements that meet real world demands.

Some non-exhaustive examples of topics that could contribute to this session are:

Techniques for the analysis of reports on past crises cases Using qualitative research techniques to capture requirements Using computer simulation to discover requirements Facilitating requirements capture by means of group decisions

support systems Encouraging knowledge sharing with regard to requirements by

using collaborative (web based) software Comparing crisis application with other kinds of (military)

systems to discover and sharpen requirements Using crisis scenarios to drive requirements capture Learning requirements by performing large scale (training)

exercises on the policy and operational field work levels.

This session invites practitioners, developers and researchers to provide:

Case studies describing how an R&D project (in progress) are dealing with requirements capture (2500 words);

Case studies on how requirements were captured in actual projects, with methodological explanation, justification and evaluation (Full paper, 5000 words)

Methodological proposals on ISCRAM requirements capture featuring a specific approach (See above examples) (full paper, 5000 words)

25

Authors are encouraged to submit examples of innovative multi-disciplinary approaches where methods from the social and management sciences have been merged with systems and software engineering processes.

Personal Area Networks (PAN) for Emergency Response

Chair:Susan McGrath, Susan.P.McGrath@dartmouth.edu Director, Emergency Readiness and Response Research Center, Associate Professor of EngineeringDartmouth College

The threat of terrorist attacks and large-scale natural disasters illustrate the escalating potential for exposure to high-risk environments for both emergency responders and casualties. Thus the ability to monitor, track, and assess the state of responders and casualties have become an increasingly important aspect of homeland security research. Advances in sensor and networking technologies can facilitate the development of real-time monitoring and assessment networks, called Personal Area Networks (PANs). Papers related to the creation and use of PANs for emergency response will be presented in this session. Topics to be discussed include:

Integration and impact of sensors for physiological and environmental monitoring

GPS , motes and other responder tracking network applications Wireless networks applications for PANs Application of small and embedded processing devices for

responder and casualty systems System level use of PAN data, including resource planning and

allocation Applications for PAN information visualization

Public warning, information, and engagement

Chair: Art Botterell, acb@incident.com

Papers are invited that deal with any aspect of the design, development, deployment, operation, or evaluation of information systems for public warning, emergency public information and public collaborative media in emergencies. Authors should focus on “citizen situational awareness,” input and approval of warning messages,

26

coordination of multiple warning systems, warning to non-English speaking populations and to people with sensory disabilities, follow-on emergency public information, and participatory media.

We are particularly interested in new and challenging approaches to support for alerting, informing, and reassuring the public, and for allowing the public to assist in meeting their own information needs.

Indicative topics of interest are:

Public warning systems Public reporting and “did you feel it?” systems Blogs, Wikis and wireless messaging in emergencies Community awareness systems Common Alerting Protocol Warning system controls Sensors and real-time metrics

Real-time alerts for earthquakes and tsunami.

Chair: Max Wyss, wapmerr@maxwyss.com http://www.maxwyss.com/curriculum_e.html

On a global scale, earthquakes can now be reliably located and their magnitude estimated within 10 to 15 minutes. In local, high performance seismograph networks this is possible within seconds. From these capabilities derive the following possibilities. (1) Using a local network (scale up to 300 km), early warnings can be issued, that is, critical facilities may be shut down and people warned before the destructive S-waves arrive. (2) On a global and regional scale (greater than 300 km), people and facilities may be warned of an approaching tsunami. (3) Losses due to earthquakes can be estimated within minutes, instead of days, to alert rescue teams of the need to mobilize. Some of these techniques have been applied for decades, others only recently and still others are mostly in the design stage. All of the techniques face obstacles to efficient implementation. Some of these could be removed, if the required funds were available, others need further research and testing to be reduced. This session aims at summarizing the current level of capabilities to warn and to outline approaches to remove obstacle that still prevent us from effectively helping the population in the struggle against earthquake disasters.

Research Methods in Crisis Decision Making and Support

27

Chair: David Mendonça, david.mendonca@njit.edu, Information Systems Dept., New Jersey Institute of Technology

By examining human response to crises, we improve our understanding of the potential and limits of human and technological capabilities, thereby improving society’s ability to plan for and respond to future events. Yet the uniqueness, severity, spontaneity, complexity, and possible sensitivity of crises pose considerable challenges for scientific investigations into crisis decision making and supporting technologies.

Approaches to the study of crisis planning and response have encompassed field and laboratory studies, as well as less conventional techniques such as computer simulations. In many cases, there has been a strong reliance on one-shot case studies, leading to questions about the generalizability of results.

Substantial challenges therefore remain for developing sound theory about human decision making and the role of information technology in response to disaster.

Accordingly, the main objective of this session is to display state of the art research methods intended to improve understanding of human decision making during disaster response and recovery. The session will focus on methods that have been applied and evaluated, whether in the field, laboratory or in computer-based simulations. Of particular interest are papers that address any of the following topic areas:

Issues of internal and external validity in disaster research methods;

Integration of data from human and machine (e.g., sensor-based) sources;

Evaluation studies or review papers of disaster research methodologies;

Policy-level issues that may aid or inhibit data collection; Adaptation of methodologies from outside crisis response and

management.

Of secondary interest are papers that present (but do not report on the implementation or evaluation of) disaster research methods. Papers on disaster mitigation and training will generally be outside the scope of this call.

Consistent with the theme of ISCRAM, papers are especially welcome that discuss how disaster research methodologies can be used to

28

inform the design of information systems to support decision making during crisis response.

Stakeholder coordination for Crisis Management

Chair: Julie Dugdale, dugdale@irit.fr http://iihm.imag.fr/dugdale/Co-chairs: Bernard Pavard, pavard@irit.fr GRIC-IRIT Cognitive Engineering Research Group – Computer Science Research Institute of Toulouse), FranceEmergency response, management and training website - http://www.irit.fr/GRIC/ER/

Narjes Bellamine-Ben Saoud, narjes_bellamine@fulbrightweb.org RIADI-GDL, (University of La Manouba), Tunisia.

The involvement of various stakeholders (such as policy makers, health agency workers, and fire-fighters) in a crisis adds another dimension to the complexity of the situation and greatly complicates coordination efforts. In order to understand how best to respond to a crisis and to develop useful information systems it is imperative that we realize that crises are perceived differently by the various stakeholders. In particular, the stakeholders have different, often conflicting viewpoints and priorities and since their work focuses on different parts of the crisis lifecycle, the effects are seen in different time periods (i.e. short, medium, or long term). Furthermore, the political dimensions of the various groups greatly affect the communication and coordination efforts during crisis situations.

In this special session we would like to explore the theory and practices of stakeholder coordination. Specifically, we will examine how to design information systems that, firstly, could help to understand the complex interactions between the various groups and that, secondly, would help to improve stakeholder coordination in responding to a crisis. In designing efficient communication systems we need to identify the needs, resources, intentions, and political dimensions of each stakeholder group.

The design of information systems which can help to coordinate the activities of the various stakeholders at any stage of the crisis life-cycle is a challenging task. To help meet this challenge we solicit papers which describe case studies or which give descriptions of current or future information systems concerned with stakeholder coordination.

29

In addition, we are also interested in exploring how the lessons learned from our current systems can provide useful feedback in designing information systems of the future.

Questions around the topic of stakeholder coordination include:

What is the influence of the different stakeholders at various stages of the crisis and can we identify key stakeholders for the different stages in the lifecycle of emergency preparedness and response?

How does the political dimension affect needs analysis in designing information systems?

How can communication platforms help to overcome the coordination between stakeholders and make explicit each stakeholder's needs, resources, intentions, and position?

Can we identify and reconcile the various stakeholder perceptions, and how can information systems help in this task?

What is the interplay between the various stakeholders and how can we model the patterns of interaction stakeholders?

What is the role of the cognitive and social sciences in designing information systems for crisis management? 

What tools are currently available to help us understand and model the various viewpoints of the stakeholders?

The subject of stakeholder coordination is a topic which is of interest to the academic attendees as well as being of practical relevance to emergency response practitioners.

Standards in Emergency Management Systems

Chair:Jane Fedorowicz jfedorowicz@bentley.edu Rae D. Anderson Professor of Accounting and Information SystemsBentley Collegehttp://www.bentley.edu/academics_research/faculty_research/faculty_database/faculty_detail.cfm?id=293879

Emergency Management Systems (EMS) bring together disparate organizations, companies and government agencies needing to communicate and share data in unforeseen circumstances. EMS are designed to work with existing data and processes within each participating organization. As a result, one of the biggest challenges EMS face is the disparity among participants’ data, communication, technology and process standards. This session addresses the issue of

30

EMS application and systems standards from a number of perspectives. Topics include, but are not limited to:

Business-to-government and government-to-government standards

Pros and cons of de facto and de jure standards When to adopt regulated standards and when to permit

elective standards Role of web services and services oriented architectures

(SOA) Case studies describing how differences in standards

requirements are resolved in cross-jurisdictional and/or cross-agency collaborations

Governance of EMS standard setting processes and operational EMS

Political and regulatory processes for standard setting

System Dynamics for Emergency Response and Crisis Management

Chair:Peter Otto, peteotto@gmail.com Assistant Professor, MISDowling College, School of Businesshttp://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/po36/

Consistent with the ISCRAM (International Community on Information Systems for crisis response and management) conference theme to recognize the role and function of information systems for the continuous parallel “Lifecycle of Emergency Preparedness and Response”; we issue a call for papers with a focus on applying system dynamics to gain insights into the underlying dynamics in emergency response and crisis management.

One challenge in investigating emergency preparedness and response is to not only understand the feedback effects and the potential performance of the complex situations that Emergency Response systems interact with, but also to obtain structural models from the people who are in the domain. As such, we are looking for research that helps us to better understand the relationships among factors shown to be important in crisis decision making (e.g., stress, information overload and decision quality).

We welcome submissions of full papers (about 5,000 words) with specific topics but not limited to, for example:

31

What are the characteristics of organizational crisis and how can information systems be used in emergency response and crisis management?

What is the leverage of different crisis management policies? What is the effect of information overload and stress on decision-

making during a crisis situation? What factors, internal as well as external, may determine

emergency response and crisis recovery and how are these factors interrelated?

Visualization in Emergency Management

Chair: Erika Darling, edarling@mitre.orgSenior Human Factors EngineerCenter for Air Force Command and Control SystemsThe Mitre Corporation

Emergency preparedness and response personnel are faced with volumes of complex data from multiple sources and types that they must evaluate, correlate and use to support time critical decisions. Data sources may include geospatial data of various types, such as text, maps, and databases and open source information, such as newspapers, internet, and broadcast. The personnel prepare and present reportable findings utilizing hastily emerging data in a rapid response time environment. Advancements in the effectiveness of visualization can provide improvements throughout the lifecycle of emergency preparedness and response.

Papers are invited that deal with any aspect of the design, development, deployment, operation, or evaluation of information systems for visualization pertinent to the lifecycle of emergency preparedness. Of particular interest are innovative information systems for visualization that have been verified through observation or experiment.

Topics of interest include but are not limited to:

Information systems for visualization of very large volumes of highly heterogeneous data

Innovative techniques to visualize events unfolding across space and time

Novel methods for interacting with the information systems for visualization

Improvements to the human-computer interaction of GIS

32

Inventive collaborative visualization techniques for either co-located or distributed teams

33