[Peter El Hajj]

ITRC – Resilience study research for NIC Systems analysis of interdependent network vulnerabilitieshttps://nic.org.uk/app/uploads/Infrastructure-network-analysis.pdf

[Peter El Hajj]

Hey @DRossiter87 – thanks for sharing. I thought this is a good report. Since I saw your post here, I’ve been on a research exercise to find more references to “cost of bad data”.  Have you come across other studies that assess or discuss that cost? I think it is helpful knowledge to help assess the value you can get from data; both value of static data and and value of data flow between entities (like within an ecosystem of connected digital twins).

The other reference for bad data cost I came across recently is: https://hbr.org/2016/09/bad-data-costs-the-u-s-3-trillion-per-year

[Peter El Hajj]

@JRobertson – thank you sharing. Will cc colleagues from CReDo project.

FYI – @Sarah @Tom Collingwood @Chris Dent @RachelJudson

[Peter El Hajj]

@JRobertson – thank you for sharing, this is interesting. Would it be possible to share the link to the report or open data you found? 

[Peter El Hajj]

@Alexandra – Live from DCW:

 

[Peter El Hajj]

@Paul – I think that data’s direction of travel will always be towards a decision to be made. I don’t see a link between the data’s direction of travel and its ability to undermine a network, even if the entire network is in one direction (eg. train timetables).  However I see a link between ‘data connections’ and ‘network value’ although network value are difficult to quantify.

In my view digital twins are tools that enable us to make better quicker decisions, i.e. to go quicker through the information value chain (figure below) where decisions are likely to involve a form of intervention on the physical world and an intention of better outcomes. And of course data quality has a fundamental role in this (bad data > bad decisions).

The other use of data often mentioned highlighted by @Matthew is entertainment (eg. Books, Netflix, Meta, etc.).

I guess there is also a commercial/legal angle to your point on direction but I don’t think this was what you were hinting to. 

Source: Gemini Principles

[Peter El Hajj]

Interesting event! Thanks for sharing, @Graham!

[Peter El Hajj]

Hi @Ajay – great area for discussion. One step is to identify the information requirements from the existing Operation and Management frameworks.  Check out this report on process-based information requirement: 

 

[Peter El Hajj]

On 14/07/2021 at 17:16, Rich said:

That Information & Process/Intervention & Decisions I guess as what it’s called now, puts the Digital ahead of the Physical. I suppose what I am say is, can the Digital Twin influence the Physical and can we test the change “What ifs” on the Digital prior to making Intervention & Decisions on the Physical for better outcomes or doesn’t it work like that? How do you know that Intervention will have positive outcomes for the Physical?

Hi @Rich – I think testing “what ifs” scenarios is the prime feature or use case of digital twins. The scenarios could be to intervene on the physical (preventative maintenance schedule) or to prepare for an event in the future (responses to components failure or disaster on infrastructure systems). 

I think the main way to know if the intervention is having the intended outcome is build in all digital twins a feedback loop.  Depending on the scale of the DT (component, system, system-of-systems) the feedback loop (data input) might look very different and is captured differently.  It would be practically easier to assess the performance of a maintenance regime on components of a train,  then to determine if the extension of a new road has improved the productivity and social outcomes for a city (but this is very important).

Federation and enabling  digital twins interoperability is key, and I think this point on checking if the DT delivered better outcomes emphasises this as feedback data might not come from the same digital twin that did the intervention, but from a different digital twin owned by a different organisation.

[Peter El Hajj]

On 30/07/2021 at 09:37, Peter Parslow said:

I could envisage a sort of maturity level for city digital twins, ‘starting’ with those which try to keep up & working through to those which actively manage agreed aspects of the city.

Hi @Peter – thank you very much for the comments. I fully agree on your point earlier that the scope of a twin for a city is a social/governance question. I also extend that to say that a core part of the governance is the governance of information quality.

I would be interested in your thoughts on a city digital twin maturity model.  If I understood the quoted sentence correctly, the ‘maturity model’ is linked to the maturity of organisations within the city to manage digital twins; this might include defining/managing/assuring/optimising digital twins and the links to the physical world.  This makes sense. Going further it might be fair to assume that the maturity of a city in managing digital twins is the same as the maturity the organisation in this city with the lowest maturity (bad data lowers the standards for everyone).

One motive for developing the diagram shared in this thread (https://digital-twins.kumu.io/describing-digital-twins) is that digital twins themselves should be described on a spectrum of complexity dependent on the purpose of the twin which would determine how many parts and links the twin needs.  This diagram is mentally built on the idea of an organisation’s maturity (for information management for example) determines what complexity of digital twins it can support and manage efficiently.  And from that angle I feel that it links well to [my] understanding of you sentence which I could have misunderstood!  Have I missed your point? 

[Peter El Hajj]

Cc’ying @Peter who did a great presentation on F1 digital twins at the inaugural National Digital Twin day https://ice.org.uk/news-and-insight/the-civil-engineer/july-2019/digital-twins-in-f1-built-environment.

[Peter El Hajj]

On 11/08/2021 at 16:54, Ian Gordon said:

Does anyone have examples of where this kind of approach has been adopted successfully?

Hi Ian, for a high-level quick-visualisation approach I think google maps + adding layers from live data might do it: https://www.google.com/earth/outreach/learn/visualize-your-data-on-a-custom-map-using-google-my-maps/.  
I’ve seen examples which improve the visualisation using deck.gl: https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/maps-platform/high-performance-data-visualizations-google-maps-platform-and-deckgl

[Peter El Hajj]

On 13/07/2021 at 14:26, Rich said:

In terms of intervention, it should be upfront. Is intervention a good word? Can we not use the digital twin to make the physical better?

Not sure I fully got the caveat.  Intervention is linked directly with better outcomes from the physical.

 

I agree we do need a thinking emoticon but there’s the next best thing …

[Peter El Hajj]

On 13/07/2021 at 18:03, Bola Abisogun OBE said:

A great introductory resource.

Thank you, @Bola. This is only the start and it would be great to get your feedback on it. 

[Peter El Hajj]

Hi @Neil_Harrison.  It looks from the Industry Data Models Survey Document that the IES will be become publicly available soon:

I haven’t seen it yet but copying in @David Leal who might have more information on IES publication.