Methodology Adopted. The user requirements analysis for the PATHS system forms part of an overall user-centred approach to system design, and uses a mixed methods approach, with input from potential end users at every stage of the development process. Starting from a knowledge base derived from the research literature, we have designed a mixed methods approach which includes desk research, quantitative and qualitative survey methods, and controlled experiments with end users of the system. Desk research includes the analysis of relevant secondary data to provide context for the user environment (e.g. approaches to user requirements in digital cultural heritage, and existing paths and path-creation tools) and key issues in the current research agenda (e.g. personalisation, recommendation and adaptive user profiles), and supplements the work done for deliverable D1.2 State-of-the-Art. Quantitative (online questionnaire) and qualitative (in-depth user interviews) survey methods providing detailed analyses of user personal and lifestyle characteristics, information behaviours and details of tasks relating to path creation, along with exploration of their views on the „pathway‟ metaphor around which the system is to be developed. These surveys are complementary in that they cover different aspects of users‟ activities, and also enable triangulation of results on the critical area of user information behaviour and tasks, as the qualitative work investigates findings from the online survey in much greater depth. Experiments add an empirical dimension to the user requirements, introducing hands-on tasks as a means of understanding how users will interact with the system in practice. In the absence of a working system, at this stage of the project, this latter experiment-based work is somewhat hypothetical, and uses low- and medium-fidelity methods to implement a series of path-creation tasks to test the findings from the survey methods, particularly those relating to path-creation. User Groups Investigated For PATHS, we have identified the heritage, education and professional domains as being the main sources of „expert‟ users (e.g. museum curators and archivists, teachers and lecturers, heritage sector education officers, academic researchers, and publishing and tourism professionals) whom we envisage will become the most regular and prolific users of the core path-creation aspect of the system, whilst the education, heritage and general user domains will provide the main groups of „...
Methodology Adopted. In order to verify the compliance of the FIBRE-BR requirements with the CMFs evaluated, each specific requirement was analyzed for each CMF and one spreadsheet was elaborated in order to identify requirement gaps for each CMF. For each requirement, the methodology consists in labelling the CMF support the functionality as follows: • Yes • No • Partially • Do not apply • Planned The requirements are grouped by “type of requirement”. Colours are used to represent conformance or not and other information in relation to the analysed CMF as follows: “Yes” (green), “No” (red), “Partially” (yellow), “Do not apply” (grey), “Planned“(blue); This color code is similar to the regular traffic lights. In addition, we color the “ Do not apply” as Grey, in the sense that for the evaluator of the CMF this shouldn’t matter, and we color the “Planned” as Blue, corresponding to blueprints for the requirements. We start by presenting the colortable, presenting the results for every requirement number in a certain type of requirement (the rows) – the numbers are the same from D2.1, and the evaluations done by each partner (the columns). The I&M (Instrumentation and Monitoring) evaluation was done only in relation to certain requirements specifically related to I&M. Comments to explain conformance, gaps or additional comments are also eventually included.
Methodology Adopted. Post project monitoring will be carried out as per conditions stipulated in environmental clearance letter issued by MOEF&CC, consent issued by SPCB as well as according to CPCB guidelines. The project site is considered as core zone and the area lying within 10 km radius from the mine site is considered as buffer zone, where some impacts may be observed on physical and biological environment. In the buffer zone, slight impact may be observed and that too is occasional, table below showing the details of Post Project Monitoring programme: Table 6.1: Post Project monitoring programme Attributes Sampling Measurement Method Test Procedure Network Frequency
Methodology Adopted. 2.1 The process of capturing user requirements for ISP-1, ISP-2, ISP-3 While establishing the DOW for the SmartVortex project possible user scenarios have already been discussed in detail. Especially the expected impact provided with the vision of anticipated outcomes were subject of the project proposal. Due to this the consortium was able to enter directly into talks and discussions in workshops and extended brainstorming sessions to drill down the initial ideas to concrete requirements and especially to recognize added values that this project will generate. The workshops were hosted by the industrial partners, where the specialists of all affected domains and departments and the dedicated research members of the assigned work packages have taken part. In several iterations, done either with additional workshops, conference calls or personal on-to-one meetings a common brainstorming session hosted by the Technical University in Delft (TUD) has been prepared. In this session the consortium identified additional research and clarification potentials which have been in following sessions got more deeply specified hosted by LTU and UU. To elicit requirements for ISP-1 and the collaboration and decision support tools envisioned in the Smart Vortex project a common workshop and brainstorming session with all partners involved was given the following goals:
