[Nick M]

2 minutes ago, Neil Thomspon said:

Hey Steven, good to hear from you! This is a good point from the EDTF, the section under your quote says:

1. Organisations label data with keywords and the authoritative source of their definition e.g. Term [Glossary Reference]

This is exactly what our Glossary is doing, hence the shared status and the related meta data. This is not about creating a new ‘master’ glossary, our aim is to help the convergence of language in this space. They set out the problem statement well, there are many existing glossaries and there is a need to connect them! 

On the DAFNI front, we are working in collaboration with them. Also, there can never be a single initiative. We need that competitive edge to drive innovation! I’ll soon be releasing an article on the hub about the history of the internet. There were a number of competing internet protocols HTML and FTP for example. 

My urge is for members to contribute in linking these through the platform. 

Thanks Neil and Steven. BTW, the video from the DAFNI talk is available here

[Nick M]

5 minutes ago, holgerkessler said:

I totally agree that a dynamic online approach is right!

From discussions with DT Hub members, we’ve also seen lots of interest in geospatial data (and related terminology and approaches to facilitate greater interoperability with other data sets). In addition, organisations coming in with a focus on (for example) transport operations can help us to identify existing good approaches to terminology in specific industries and domains.  

[Nick M]

2 minutes ago, Neil Thomspon said:

@holgerkessler – this is a great question! We will use the meta data of the shared satus of a term to learn the connectivity to existing standards. 

Hi @holgerkessler and @Neil

A further thought is that this is a benefit of making this Glossary online/dynamic – it is easier to update as more thinking emerges including from other areas and industries

[Nick M]

3 minutes ago, Neil Thomspon said:

Hey @Miranda, good question! Yes, if we look at things like Github and Stackoverflow in the software world we can see how effective it is to connect technical people in this way. interestingly it creates a vital learning environment!

We’re also seeing demand for this kind of flexible approach to terminology related to standards in fast changing areas…for example working on an iterative vocabulary for Connected and Automated Vehicles

[Nick M]

Thanks @Simon for this excellent overview of digital twins. I particularly liked the context – how this builds on other 4th industrial revolution tech “waves” including IoT and AI.  A lot of the people I’ve talked to who have been interested in digital twins over the last few years have seen this as building on things that they are already trying to do using IoT  (and a growing emphasis of data, insights and decisions, rather than “just” whizzy sensors and devices).

Your comment that only a small fraction of the potential value has been realised is really important too. It indicates the scale of the opportunity,  but also that we have a long way to go to get there!

We’re starting to explore this in more detail through our 3rd theme “Pathway to value” here.

 

[Nick M]

Many thanks to Tanguy and everybody on this chat for all of your comments and questions.

 We are now coming to the end of our live discussion but we will keep this space open and available until the end of the day in case you have further thoughts or questions. We will continue to monitor the discussion during that time, but on a less frequent basis.

We will also add Tanguy’s video, along with the videos from previous talks, to this page: https://digitaltwinhub.co.uk/digital-twin-talks/ 

We’ve also got some good really interesting threads to follow up on afterwards) – we’ll reflect on each of these and work out the best way to take these forward.

Looking ahead, our next Digital Twin Talk, with Neil Thompson from the CDBB team will take place on Tuesday 19th at 10-30 am.
 

Thank you all very much again.

[Nick M]

Another question to everybody.

In our current environment, where we are all considering the path towards economic recovery and protecting against future shocks…how can digital twins make our cities more resilient?

 

[Nick M]

Another question – for @Tanguy and all.

What are the most valuable/attractive use cases for digital twins in cities? 

(Maybe some of these might add more examples to help with the right time vs real time debate too)

Many thanks,

Nick

 

[Nick M]

6 minutes ago, Michael Mulquin said:

In the IEC we are collecting and analysing use cases for City Information Modeling/urban digital twins in order to define the standards that are needed.  As a Systems Committee within the IEC, our role is not mainly to develop standards, but to take a systems approach to understand all the different kinds of things needed for a new technology to be successful – data standards, IoT standards, communications standards, management standards, etc. etc. and then provide the information to the relevant Technical Committees in the appropriate Standards Development Organisations to help them develop the family of standards needed.  We formally started work on this project in January, but things have been put on hold for a while, due to Covid 19. We hope to restart things soon.

We very much welcome experts to join us in this, so please get in touch, if you would like to find out more.

IEC_TS_63273_ED1_City_Information_Modeling_Use_Case_Collection_20191211.pdf 3.62 MB · 1 download

Hi @Michael Mulquin

Many thanks for sharing this. It would be great to learn more about the use case information that you are collecting and to work out how best to share some of that thinking on the DT Hub (we’ll take a look at the attachment you shared to start with).

Also, please can you let this community know the best way to get involved in the project you mention.

Thanks again, Nick

 

 

 

[Nick M]

3 minutes ago, DRossiter87 said:

Hi Tanguy, 
Thank you for the video, very interesting.  You mentioned the need to manage the latency between the changes to the physical asset and its representation digitally.  What I wanted to ask if there are two distinct latencies:

1. The time from an intervention to when it is reflected physically (e.g. a planned intervention such as a road closure);
2. Time time from when the sensor data is collected to when it is reflected digitally (e.g.  to import, configure, review, and publish)

Please see image below (trying) to explain what I mean

[Nick M]

3 minutes ago, Tanguy Coenen said:

Hi Michael,

Thank you for your insights!

As I mention in the video, we try to keep up-to-date with current international efforts on smart cities, so we would be very interested to engage in conversation on the topics you mention.

If there are any references to texts you could send over that provide more info, that would be great too.

Hi @Michael Mulquin

Many thanks for your comments. We see a lot of interest from local authorities and cities in digital twins and it would be great to explore the links between smart cities and digital twins.

@Tanguy it would also be great if you have any thoughts on the difference or similarities between the two please.

Many thanks

Nick

 

 

 

[Nick M]

To get the ball rolling…a first question from me please to @Tanguy

In your view, what is an Urban Digital Twin?

Thanks, Nick

 

 

[Nick M]

Welcome to the start of today’s Digital Twin Talk on Urban Digital Twins and a big thank you to @Tanguy from imec for joining us. We’re looking forward to your thoughts and questions related to Tanguy’s video – and maybe posing one or two of our own.

Please do start adding your thoughts by replying to the conversation thread.
 

[Nick M]

A huge thank you to @Brian and to all of you for some really interesting comments and questions.  We are now coming to the end of our live chat but we will keep this space open and available until the end of Wednesday in case you have further thoughts or comments that you would like to add. We will continue to monitor the discussion during that time, but on a less frequent basis.

We had multiple conversation threads, each of which we could have spent more time on – we’ll reflect on each of these and work out the best way to take these forward and link into the work of the DT Hub and the wider National Digital Twin programme.

If you didn’t already, you can register your interest from the home page and you can also contact us on enquiries@digitaltwinhub.co.uk

Thank you all very much again. 

[Nick M]

Just now, Brian Matthews said:

HI Andrew,

This is a question we constantly ask ourselves – we provide computing for research of all sorts and its always a balance.  But we feel that there is continuing value of a specialist common hub with dedicated skills and resources for that community which can be shared.   We can use public cloud to expand out – again by having common interoperability standards that can be managed.   I am sorry, I missed the dicussion last week unfortunately – were there particular points there which came from that discussion?

thanks

Brian

 

Hi @Andrew Myers

Many thanks for this. Also, relating back to the talk from ODI last week, I think that DAFNI is a great example of the kind of data intermediary that I think @olivierthereaux was suggesting will be needed to support networks of digital twins. 

Would be great to get any further thoughts you have on areas where this kind of intermediary approach could be useful.

Many thanks, Nick