+351 253 510 580 Mon - Fri. 09:00 - 18:00
Follow us:

img1

  1. image: HeritageCARE project

 

The European project HeritageCARE is part of the Interreg-SUDOE initiative and aim at implementing a sustainable and integrated methodology to preserve and maintain our historical and cultural heritage. Part of this initiative, we are investigating to find what virtual and augmented reality can do for us.

Let us focus first on virtual reality (VR) and understand what it is. VR is an artificial environment that is created with software and presented to the user in such a way that he suspends belief and accepts it as a real environment. The last part is the most important; immersion is the key to define VR. This immersion factor is what leads VR to be such a good medium when it comes to training, education or interactive story. Therefore, we can build digital copy of buildings to allow anyone to see it from any place at any time. This could lead to a new dimension to share our heritage.

Therefore, we can build digital copy of buildings to allow anyone to see it from any place at any time. This could lead to a new dimension to share our heritage.

 

On top of the recreational aspect of being able to visit those monuments from the comfort of our home there is also preservation at stake. Indeed historical places are destroyed on a regular basis due to natural causes such as time, climate change, floods, earthquakes but also human activity like war, arson and urban sprawls. VR will not stop those unfortunate actions from happening but will allow visiting those buildings even after such fate happened. Companies like CyArk[1] have been created towards this unique goal of creating buildings’ digital copy before they receive any severe injury.

The principle to generate 3D model of a building is a mature process and lead to satisfactory result. First, a point cloud acquisition of the building is performed usually using a combination of time of flight scanner, robust at long distance and to detect plan, and photogrammetry, good at detecting edges and corner. From this point cloud a mesh as to be created using triangulation technics to connect the dots. Then texture is added to the model by superimposing photo of the building over the mesh[2]. Finally, the 3D object can be integrated to a VR engine, which add virtual lights, movement and interactivity to complete the VR experience.

2

image 2: process  used to digitalize buildings

Now, let us shift our interest towards augmented reality (AR) and more generally towards mixed reality (MR). AR is the ability to display additional contextualized information on top of the real environment. However, the experience can be pushed further by allowing real world interaction to affect virtual object this is why the term mixed reality started to emerge since there is a cohabitation between the real and virtual environment.

 

3

image 3: Reality–virtuality continuum

 

For the HeritageCARE project, Microsoft HoloLens will be used to generate MR experience, which is the top players in its category. For a long time MR where mostly used through cameras of our portable devices such as phones and tablets but true MR is to be experienced through glasses where your vision of the world is not a video and your hands remain free. On top of that, the HoloLens bring voice and simple gesture recognition, which makes it an ideal hardware for our needs. However, it is important to remember we are in presence of the first development version. Therefore, limitations are to take into consideration, such as small field of view, limited battery life and impossibility to see virtual object close up. All of that will undoubtedly getting better in the future generations.

4

image 4. HoloLens: Microsoft Press tool pictures.

MR will allow the user to superimpose the virtual mesh to the real building, allowing direct interaction with each parametric object of the BIM on the fly…

Main use case of the HoloLens for the HeritageCARE project is to ease and increase efficiency of building inspectors. Especially at the service management level 3 where the Building Information Modelling (BIM) will be used. MR will allow the user to superimpose the virtual mesh to the real building, allowing direct interaction with each parametric object of the BIM on the fly, accessing past inspection data and saving the new one. In addition, if small maintenance tasks has to be performed, AR assistance can be develop for simple task and in case additional knowledge is required, AR remote assistance may be used. This will allow an experimented user to connect to the HoloLens to see inspectors’ vision and display contextual information to help them completing their task.

All of this is exciting and I am sure we will discover new way of helping inspectors and owners in our quest of preserving and maintaining our historical and cultural heritage. If you are interested in the HeritageCARE initiative, do not hesitate to follow and share our Facebook page or visit our website (under construction) to follow our progress.


» Facebook page

» web: http://heritagecare.eu


ADRIEN

Adrien Fonnet

Adrien Fonnet is graduated from the French engineering school, Arts et Metiers, and a master research in 3d visualization. Currently working as part of the CCG/cVIG team, in particular on the HeritageCARE initiative. In parallel, he is conducting a thesis on Augmented Reality Smart Assistance part of the MAPi doctoral program in computer science. His interest focus on augmented reality, virtual reality and human computer interaction.


[1] http://www.cyark.org/

[2] MURPHY, Maurice, MCGOVERN, Eugene, et PAVIA, Sara. Historic building information modelling (HBIM). Structural Survey, 2009, vol. 27, no 4, p. 311-327.

 

CAD_webbanner_connectedautodriving_10Feb17-03

“1st European Conference on Connected and Automated Driving” reúne os maiores stakeholders da indústria automóvel ! Este evento, organizado pela Comissão Europeia, decorrerá nos dias 3 e 4 de abril e serão transmitidas, via webcast, sessões relativas ao tema.
Atendendo à relevância da temática, consideramos oportuno abrir o nosso auditório para todos os interessados, nomeadamente os Professores / Investigadores /Alunos da UM (particularmente os envolvidos ou interessados no projeto INNOVCAR), para assistir connosco à transmissão via Web streaming das sessões plenárias que irão debater os avanços científicos/tecnológicos na área dos transportes autónomos e a discutir os programas de financiamento europeus.

DIA 3 DE ABRIL:
9:45 – 10:30: Research and Innovation Challenges of Connected and Automated Driving

For several years huge R&I efforts are being invested in developing and demonstrating systems for connected and automated driving (CAD). Significant progress has been made in key technologies for innovative CAD functions and applications (e.g. advanced vehicle control, systems to detect vehicle location and environment, data processing, artificial intelligence, human-machine interaction, etc.). To make the next step towards roll out, large-scale pilots are necessary to test and improve the performance and safety of innovative CAD systems and to study market potentials and risks.

Speakers:

15:25 – 16:10: Digital technologies enabling Connected and Automated Driving

Connected and Automated Driving (CAD) helps to address many of the major challenges of today’s transport system. CAD has the potential to improve safety, energy efficiency, air quality, traffic throughput and enhance user comfort and convenience. An even bigger impact is expected from shifting value chains: connectivity and high levels of automation enable innovative mobility services and provide users with new choices.

Speakers:

 


DIA 4 DE ABRIL
08:30 – 9:15: EU Member States programmes on connected and automated driving

This session will provide an overview of current policy measures adopted by European Member States including available funding programmes and support to large-scale testing facilities.

Speakers:

9:15 – 10:00: Cooperative ITS deployment towards connected and automated driving

This plenary session on C-ITS will bring together experts from both the public and private sector. They will expand on what Cooperative ITS brings to them, what they get out of the work being done within the C-ITS platform and why they felt the need to get involved in this platform. On the C-Roads Platform, you will hear about who is involved in this project, what services it will deploy and what are the expected outcomes and feedback into the C-ITS policy work.

Speakers:

10:30 – 11:15: Which policy and regulatory EU frameworks for connected and automated driving

Policy and regulatory actions in favour of CAD are already taking place within the Commission and the Member States. But automated and connected vehicles raise cross-cutting issues (traffic law, liability, vehicle certification, connectivity infrastructure, etc.) involving different departments within the Commission or within the Member States which require working together in a coherent manner. This is the reason why the Commission launched at the beginning of 2016 the GEAR 2030 High level group. The main objective of this Plenary Session will be to give an overview of the GEAR 2030 work and discuss the first recommendations for CAD.

Speakers:

11:15 – 12:00: International cooperation on connected and automated driving

Many of the challenges on the way towards deployment of CAD systems can be better addressed in cooperation with international partners. It is essential to develop and maintain close cooperation with other regions of the world to exchange knowledge, expertise and best practises and to work towards a global framework and international standards for connectivity and automation technologies.

Speakers:

  • Dr. Gereon Meyer, Dept. Future Technologies and Europe, VDI/VDE-I&T, Germany
  • Seigo Kuzumaki, Program Director of SIP-adus, Chief Safety Technology Officer Secretary, Chief Professional Engineer – Safety, R&D and Engineering Management Div., Toyota Motor Corporation, Japan
  • Lam Wee Shann, Group Director, Technology and Industry Development, Land Transport Authority, Ministry of Transport, Singapore
  • Dr. Steven Shladover, California PATH Program Manager, University of California Berkeley, USA

 


Local: Auditório CCG, Campus de Azurém

Site da conferência: http://connectedautomateddriving.eu/

banner_market

O TSI2MARKET (http://tsi2market.dsi.uminho.pt/) é um evento anual organizado pelo Núcleo de Estudantes de Sistemas de Informação que procura aproximar os estudantes do mercado de trabalho, promovendo ações de formação, workshops, desafios, sessões temáticas e networking privilegiado com as melhores empresas ligadas às Tecnologias de Informação.

Serão 4 dias de evento (3 a 6 de abril) em que se pretende aproximar a comunidade académica das empresas. Neste sentido, o CCG junta-se a um conjunto de empresas presentes no TSIMARKET 2017 e irá promover  uma sessão de Realidade Aumentada e Realidade Virtual. Esta sessão irá ser realizada no CCG, no dia 4 de abril, a partir das 16h00. As inscrições podem ser realizadas a partir DESTE FORMULÁRIO

Plano de sessão temática no CCG: Centro de Computação Gráfica:

Atividade: Apresentação Institucional do Centro de Computação Gráfica

Local: Anfiteatro CCG

Orador: João Nuno Oliveira

 

Atividade: Apresentação sobre Realidade Aumentada e Realidade Virtual: Cenário atual, dispositivos e suas aplicações em projetos de Investigação e Desenvolvimento Tecnológico 

Local: Anfiteatro CCG

Orador: Nuno Sousa

 

Atividade: Demonstrações de Realidade Aumentada e Realidade Virtual

Local: OpenSpaces e Hall CCG

Demonstrações:

  1. Realidade Aumentada Móvel (ARRouter)
  2. Realidade Aumentada baseada em Display Fixo (Magic Body Maping)
  3. Realidade Virtual (Oculus Rift)
  4. Realidade Aumentada com Som 3D Binaural
  5. Realidade Virtual (Simulador Automóvel)
  6. Demonstração de Projeto Industrial

 

Atividade: Fecho Sessão Temática

Local: Anfiteatro CCG

In recent years cities have been instrumented with more and more technology, culminating even with the emergence of new terms such as Smart Cities or Digital Cities, for example.

However, at the level of human mobility it seems that the direction is precisely the opposite. Traffic congestions with a greater impact or an unsatisfactory supply of public transport to the needs of the inhabitants are just two examples of the current difficulty of mobility within and between urban spaces, which, due to their recurrent nature, influence the quality of life of individuals.

 

Traffic congestions with a greater impact or an unsatisfactory supply of public transport to the needs of the inhabitants are just two examples of the current difficulty of mobility within and between urban spaces…

On the other hand, with the increase in installed technology (with the potential to be used as a mobility sensor) or through the constant increase of the digital footprint that each individual produces in their interaction with the surrounding environment, it would be expected that the path was in the sense of the Smart Cities to be able to understand the mobility needs of its inhabitants and, in that sense, to adjust in the best way to meet the same needs.

The results obtained by Marta González [1] related to the nature of human mobility (in particular in regard to the existence of patterns in human trajectories) have fostered the emergence of several works centered on the analysis of human mobility based on physical sensors and / or which, that to a greater or lesser extent, allow the creation of individual and global maps of mobility.

In this way, Information Technologies and Systems are an added value for the understanding of human mobility and are, and could become even more, a relevant support tool for the planning of our cities, particularly at the mobility level. This idea is already late, as early as 1995 Louis Alfeld [2] considered that the observation of urban dynamics should help decision-makers or cities planners and planners of other urban spaces.

But if on the one hand we have the technology at our disposal and, on the other hand, there are examples of the use of information for the characterization of human mobility in urban spaces, the question that arises is:

 

Why are we not making the most of these resources in a better planning of our cities?

 

In this sense, it is important to create an ecosystem of urban mobility [3] with different stakeholders and to foster the paradigm shift as to the correct planning of mobility. This change is not so technological, since technology exists and is even in some cases disseminated by cities, but rather a change in the way urban planning is done.

This change is undoubtedly important, since the cost of creating or modifying infrastructures within an urban space normally has a large financial impact, so investment is justified only if it is an asset for the citizens and for space itself.

Thus, the urban mobility ecosystem would be constituted by a set of entities and minimum interactions to ensure, on the one hand, the continuous observation of the urban space, and on the other, the adequate performance according to the latest available information.

 

img_sc

 

The urban space and the individuals that interact with it are in the origin of phenomena associated with human mobility that must be observed; its Observation through the most varied sensors produces a more or less extensive set of Data; which, in turn, are the basis of the Analysis that is intended to be carried out; individual and global Maps of human mobility will be produced as a result of the analysis, with recommendations or concerns regarding identified constraints / anomalies; these recommendations should affect an adequate Planning and a set of actions to be carried out; it is based on these results that the Performance on the urban space is realized.

This process is consecutively repeated since, after interventions in urban space, it is quite natural for behavior to be altered and, as such, it must now be identified. It is also natural that, over time and due to the dynamics existing in urban spaces, it is necessary to measure the current state of human mobility with some periodicity.

The application of an architecture equal to or close to the one presented previously is of great relevance in the planning of urban spaces, since it closes a cycle beginning with observation, passing through the decision and culminating in the performance.

 

What has been common practice is to decide and intervene without the necessary information for the correct decision making, often deciding even without knowing the real needs of both the city and its inhabitants.

 

 

At this moment we are facing a scenario with all the conditions for the change to occur. The first step in the realization of this reality is to bring together, in the same effort, the actors from different technological areas to jointly identify the most relevant problems and ways of minimizing them.

The creation of multidisciplinary teams that jointly discuss and change human mobility in a planned way is the basis for making our cities even more intelligent.

 

Sources:
[1] M. C. González, C. a Hidalgo, and A.-L. Barabási, “Understanding individual human mobility patterns” Nature, vol. 453, no. 7196, pp. 779–82, Jun. 2008.

[2] L. E. Alfeld, “Urban dynamics-The first fifty years” Syst. Dyn. Rev., vol. 11, pp. 199–217, 1995.

[3] Tese de doutoramento em Tecnologias e Sistemas de Informação, submetida em Outubro de 2016 na Universidade do Minho, sob orientação do Professor Adriano Moreira (UM) e do Professor Carlos Bento (UC).


peixoto

João Peixoto | Project manager @CCG

João Peixoto has a degree in Informatics Engineering, a Master’s degree in Informatics and Systems, and as a student of PDTSI at the University of Minho, he submitted the thesis “From Observation to Trajectory: formalization of a spatio-temporal information structure”. He is a project manager at CCG: Centro de Computação Gráfica at D.I.A UMC and researcher at the Algoritmi Center at the University of Minho. His research interests center on human mobility, urban computing, mobile computing, and sensorised information.

The statement that underlies this text is from the former American President Barack Obama, who, in essence, underlines what remains to be the enormous impact of the Internet on contemporary society and humanity.

Like water or electricity, the truth is that the Internet, in fact, has become a dependency for much of the world’s population. According to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), there are an estimated 3,448 million Internet users worldwide, an impressive number that has grown more than three times since 2005. At that time, they were “just over” 1 billion Internet users.

According to the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), there are an estimated 3,448 million Internet users worldwide, an impressive number that has grown more than three times since 2005.

 

However, this number reveals another harsh reality. In practice, it confirms that we live in an unjust world, an unequal and asymmetrical world that does not respond equitably to the needs of the citizens scattered throughout our planet. It is that those almost 3.5 billion Internet users account for less than half the world’s population. The truth is that only 47 out of 100 inhabitants are Internet users, that is, with the Internet being a necessity, more than half of the population is on the margins of its use and of the benefits of this technology.

If we disaggregate the information by the level of development of the countries, 81 out of every 100 inhabitants in the developed countries are Internet users, while only 40 out of every 100 inhabitants in the developing countries are Internet users. In the regional context, in Europe we are 79 in every 100 inhabitants, while in Africa there are 25 in every 100 inhabitants Internet users. In Asia and the Pacific we are talking about 42 out of 100.

Turning to the Portuguese reality, according to data recently published by INE, we are 70% Internet users, below the EU28 average.

 

Turning to the Portuguese reality, according to data recently published by INE, we are 70% Internet users, a number below the EU28 average. However, as it happens in the international context, this number does not say everything in relation to what is happening in Portugal. In order to know more about our reality, we must mention that in the North there are 65%, while in the Lisbon Metropolitan Area (AM Lisboa) there are 82%, which confirms, also, that also in this matter the regional asymmetries registered in our country are significant.

This is even confirmed by the Regional Digital Index that measures the regional asymmetries in the construction of the Information Society in Portugal. The edition published in June 2016 in a partnership between Universidade do Minho / CCG and FCT, records the enormous supremacy of AM Lisboa in relation to all other Portuguese NUTs II regions, not only in the global index, but also in each of the four sub-indices that integrate the IDR: Context, Infrastructure, Utilization and Impact.

 

There is a need to find ways to blur asymmetries and to promote more equitable access and use of ICT and the Internet, not only in the global context, but also in our own country.

 

In this world characterized by the rapid technological evolution, assuming as true the opening phrase of President Obama that considers the Internet a necessity, it is urgent to find ways to blur asymmetries and to promote conditions of greater justice for access and use to ICT and the Internet, not only in the global context, but also in our own country. To do this, we need to know our territory much better than we know it today, not only as a whole, but above all according to local and regional specificities and weaknesses. Only in this way will we be able, now and in the future, to define public (and private) policies that can make our country more cohesive and, by the way, globally more competitive.

 

Sources:

 


luis_miguel_ferreira

Luís Miguel Ferreira | External researcher @CCG

Luís Miguel Ferreira has a degree in Mathematics, a Master in Mathematics Teaching and a PhD in Information Technologies and Systems from the University of Minho, with a thesis on “Measuring the Information Society in the Regional Context: A new instrument and its application to the current situation”. He expresses interest in research in the area of measurement of information society and e-government. He has been collaborating with the national authorities responsible for the information society and the development of e-government. He is also an external researcher of the GCC.

 banner_pub-02

Site do evento: http://wud.eventos.ccg.pt/

O Domínio de Investigação aplicada PIU: Perception, Interation and Usability, do CCG, Centro de Computação Gráfica, assinala no próximo dia 10 de novembro, o Dia Mundial da Usabilidade, com um conjunto de palestras e demonstrações interativas.

Público-alvo:

Empresas IT

Departamentos de Design, Usabilidade, Marketing

Investigadores de universidades, Institutos e Restantes interessados

 

10 de novembro de 2016

MANHÃ

9h00: Check-in
9h30: Boas-vindas. João Nuno Oliveira, Diretor Executivo do CCG
Apresentação PIU e Programa WUD2016. Jorge Santos (Coordenador Científico PIU, CCG) /Sandra Mouta, Coordenadora PIU, CCG
10h00: O processo de UX em Inovação. Nuno Ribeiro, BOSCH
10h45: A Importância de Conhecer o Utilizador para o Desenvolvimento de Ambientes Imersivos. Carlos Silva, CCG

11h30: Coffee Break // DEMOS

12h00: UX na Altice Labs – Estratégia e Impacto. Inês Oliveira, Altice Labs
12h45: Intervalo para Almoço

TARDE

14h30: Apresentação ADUUX – Associação para o Desenvolvimento da Usabilidade e Experiência de Utilização. Joana Vieira, CCG.
14h45: O novo renascimento, ou o utilizador no centro do nosso mundo. Hugo Silva, NOS
15h30: Emília Duarte, IADE
16h15 Coffee Break // DEMOS

16h45 Ana Barros, CITEVE
17h30: MagUXto

As demonstrações estarão sempre disponíveis nos Coffee Breaks e restantes intervalos. Decorrerão no hall e CAVE do CCG. Estarão presentes:

 

Associação CCG / ZGDV : Centro de Computação Gráfica

Gratuitas (obrigatórias): Inscreva-se aqui

Morada: Campus de Azurém, 4800-058, Guimarães – Portugal

GPS: Lat 41º 27´ 11.80´´ Long -8º 17´ 18.21´´

Telefone: +351 253 510 580

email: comunicacao@ccg.pt

Web: www.ccg.pt

interrreg-01

The kick off meeting of the European project HeritageCARE from the Interreg-SUDOE program took place on October 3rd and 4th, 2016, at the Department of Civil Engineering of the University of Minho (Portugal), leader partner of the project.

The main goal of the HeritageCARE project is to implement an integrated and sustainable methodology for the preventive conservation and maintenance of the historic and cultural heritage buildings, based on a joint system of services provided by a non-profit entity to be created in Portugal, Spain, and France.

This project will give rise to the first joint strategy for preventive conservation of built cultural heritage within the South-West Europe.

  1. University of Minho (Portugal, Project Leader) at ISISE and IB-S
  2. Direção Regional de Cultura do Norte (Portugal)
  3. Centro de Computação Gráfica (Portugal)
  4. Universidad de Salamanca (Escuela Politécnica Superior de Ávila) (Spain)
  5. Instituto Andaluz del Patrimonio Histórico (Spain)
  6. Fundación Santa María la Real del Patrimonio Histórico (Spain)
  7. Université de Limoges (France)
  8. Université Blaise Pascal (France)

 

  1. Associação Portuguesa das Casas Antigas (Portugal)
  2. Arquidiocese de Braga (Portugal)
  3. GECoRPA – Grémio do Património (Portugal)
  4. Asociación Hispania Nostra (Spain)
  5. Asociación Española de Gestores de Patrimonio Cultural (Spain)
  6. Adeco Camino (Spain)
  7. Direction régionale des affaires culturelles Auvergne Rhône-Alpes (France)
  8. Ecole Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Clermont-Ferrand (France)
  9. Louis Gineste (France)
  10. Atelier d’Architecture PANTHEON (France)
  11. Cabinet d’Architecture Pascal Parmantier – Architecte Du Patrimoine (France)

 

The HeritageCARE project is Co-funded by the ERDF within the Interreg-SUDOE program with a total financial commitment of (Euro) 1.686.282,82 €.

interreg-copia

The concept of smart city is present in the agendas of the main stakeholders that gravitate around cities, municipalities, or in a broader way, of issues of the territory. This is true in both developed and developing countries. This concern comes from the added value of information technologies in the management of a city, as well as from the continuous deterioration of the quality of life in cities. On the one hand, the increase in urban population is unprecedented, with the UN estimating that the world’s urban population will increase from 52% to 80% by 2050. This increase is also driven by increases in pollution levels and congestion in cities. There is thus the challenge of improving the quality of life for urban citizens, also serving as an engine for economic performance, as well as enhancing the efficient use of resources, supporting environmental sustainability. Information technologies, allied to the human capital of a city, can be the means to realize this intelligence and to achieve the goals of making a city socially, economically and environmentally sustainable.

 

“Information technologies, allied to the human capital of a city, can be the means to realize this intelligence and to achieve the goals of making a city socially, economically and environmentally sustainable.”

 

A smart city can be defined as a multidisciplinary domain, which brings together several areas of intervention and skills to achieve development. These areas are, at their core, supported by information technologies, hence their intelligence endowment, but they must also have a strong orientation towards their governance, supported by civic participation, as well as being sources of economic development. Intelligent cities therefore need action plans that will enable them to monitor the implementation of initiatives, as well as to measure the expected benefits of each investment, and with that, there is an understanding that information technologies are not an end, but rather a means to attain intelligence.

“A smart city can be defined as a multidisciplinary domain, which brings together several areas of intervention and skills to achieve development.”

 

Each city is different, and has been “built” and developed based on different paradigms. In this sense, any development and evolution, thought for a city, must take into account this reality and which paradigm will want to achieve. To improve the quality of life of citizens, you must realize their needs, but also realize what the needs of a city are. It can focus on developments derived from information technologies, or evolve in a technology-driven, technology-driven society. It can also be a smart city from the point of view of a competitive and advanced industry that creates an urban ecosystem, or an environmentally advanced city that uses green technologies and is the pinnacle of environmental sustainability. It is up to decision-makers to think the path ahead and choose the best initiatives they should support, but always taking into account the desired evolution paradigm, that transformation is slow and necessary, and that information technologies are a valuable support.

 

“A city can thus focus on developments derived from information technologies, or have a development focused on the needs of a society, supported by technologies.”

 

To support this evolution, and to enable a monitoring, there are several tools and models that can be used. A tool, in the form of a model, that can respond to this need, to consider a paradigm of evolution, that defines and measures areas of action, and allows prescribing actions to achieve the desired evolution is the maturity models. A maturity model has as main objective to improve processes of an organization, making them efficient, from defined evolutionary paths. An organization evolves based on defined maturity levels, and cumulative, which are measured through indicators. It is also important in the field of cities to develop maturity models that define maturity paths that allow the adaptation and configuration of monitoring criteria to be applied to different cities and to consider a city in a holistic way.

 

Sources:

 


pedro

Pedro Torrinha | business developer @CCG

banner_evento_site

Site do evento: http://opendayepmq.eventos.ccg.pt/

O Domínio de Investigação Aplicada EPMQ: “Engineering Process Maturity and Quality”, do CCG: Centro de Computação Gráfica irá abrir portas às temáticas:

Saúde – “A interoperabilidade da informação no setor da saúde”;

Indústria – “O papel dos sistemas de informação na 4ª revolução industrial”;

Cidades – “Dados Abertos e a Sustentabilidade das Cidades”.

Este Open Day irá reunir um conjunto de profissionais, investigadores e empresas (TI e Não TI), com interesse nas áreas da Saúde, Indústria, Cidades, e nas suas aplicações, promovendo, deste modo, a discussão de temas relevantes na área de Sistemas de Informação.

Empresas, organizações, investigadores

21 de outubro de 2016

MANHÃ

TARDE

 

Associação CCG / ZGDV : Centro de Computação Gráfica

Gratuitas (obrigatórias): Inscreva-se aqui

Morada: Campus de Azurém, 4800-058, Guimarães – Portugal

GPS: Lat 41º 27´ 11.80´´ Long -8º 17´ 18.21´´

Telefone: +351 253 510 580

email: comunicacao@ccg.pt

Web: www.ccg.pt

http://opendayepmq.eventos.ccg.pt/

 

 

 

In this article, an analysis will be made of the communication of requirements between a client entity and the team, and in the team there may be someone directly responsible for collecting the client’s needs, commonly called Business Analyst (BA), or Engineer of Requirements (ER). Three possible ways of communicating the requirements are mentioned:

Criteria for success / failure

Once a project has been completed, lessons learned sessions will be held. Has the project been successful or unsuccessful? For the organization, the definition of success / failure can be based on the criteria:

More than realizing whether the project was successful or unsuccessful, it is also important to understand the circumstances that led to this success / failure. To this end, the annual report CHAOS Report of the Standish Group [1] is a reference that defines the success factors of a project. From the point of view of requirements analysis, the factor at the top of this report is customer involvement. This relates mainly to communication, having the client “close” to the development team and involving him in the whole process. Involvement is related to the success of the project in that, if the client is aware of the project, he knows exactly the outcome that will be delivered to him and can communicate in a timely manner any changes he may wish to make.

The client must have space to listen and to be heard, he should be treated as a partner (working with him and not for him).

 

“Involvement” is high on the CHAOS Report list because of the expectations management during the project. Managing customer expectations is to ensure that the assumptions made by the client in a software project are realistic and consistent with software delivery. Since the requirements process is a primary channel between the client and the team, can there be a relationship between expectations management and the way the requirements are communicated? And how do you define requirements communication to enhance project success?

 

“A problem well stated is a problem half solved.”

Charles F. Kettering

 

A requirement depicts a condition or ability that is necessary to satisfy a purpose or need. The communication of needs, through the definition of requirements, is of high importance for developing the solution that the team has proposed. The requirements are transversal to any engineering project, be it software, electronic, mechanical, civil, etc. projects. Each engineering project must include requirements tasks, whether related to survey, documentation, negotiation, validation, communication, among others [2]. Communication (verbal or written, formal or informal) is the medium for passing information between the client and the development team. One of the most critical requirements problems is that it depends heavily on the interpretation of who raises or documents them. The research on problems in requirements refers us to the following illustration:

cartoon_projetos-01

Fonte img: projectcartoon

  1. As the client explained
  2. As the analyst specified
  3. As the programmer developed
  4. As the client really wanted!

“The most important single aspect of software development is to be clear about what you are trying to build.”
Bjarne Stroustrup

 

 The communication of needs by the Client to the BA/ER

The Business Analysis Body of Knowledge (BABoK) [3], from IIBA®, a reference guide for requirements, categorizes requirements in:

BABoK, as well as the Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge  (SWEBoK), present the following requirements-gathering techniques:

All of these techniques have advantages and disadvantages, and are more suitable in certain circumstances than others (they will not be described here, given the number of techniques, so BABoK describes these situations in detail for each technique in its “Techniques” chapter) , so the process of (communication of) the requirements to be adopted depends on the specificity of each project. It should be taken into account who participates, how many participate, the processes to be supported, among others. For example, an interview is advantageous in the sense of direct contact, allowing for more personal responses, as well as the observation of gestures or tone of voice. On the other hand, if the number of participants is high, then the most advantageous option is to conduct questionnaires. If the idea focuses heavily on flows and sequential tasks, process observation is most appropriate.

The communication of the requirements collected by the BA/ER to the Client for validation

The next step in the BA / ER task is to record what was raised in the previous customer-> BA / RE interaction. This record is given the name of documentation of the requirements, and refers to a set of documentary information that will serve as evidence in the “contract” concluded between client and team. Documentation of requirements serves two purposes. 1. Validation of requirements with the client; 2. Pass the information to the development team for the implementation of the solution (the last two “ways” mentioned at the beginning of this article). This latter purpose, not constituting a client-team communication, is not analyzed in depth in this article.

Documentation of more customer-oriented requirements follows more high-level formats and no more technical information. The most significant examples are: UML diagrams (use cases and activities), user stories, prototyping (via wireframes or mockups).

It is on the set of documented requirements that the second possible “way” reported in this article, the BA / RE -> customer communication is based. In this case, the communication is not associated to the survey of requirements and needs, but to validate the information that was collected in the previous interactions. This type of communication is of great relevance in the aforementioned client involvement, since the form (as well as the frequency) as this interaction is carried out has direct implications in the management of customer expectations. Here, BABoK and SWEBoK also propose identical techniques for the validation of requirements, and, unlike the previous interaction, the BA / ER can use complementarily:

It should be noted that there are no great advantages in communicating too technical requirements to the customer, since this “language” is not always perceivable by the customer. The more technical documentation should be directed to the development team, where the communication of the requirements is done in a perspective of “passing of knowledge” acquired in previous interactions (client-> BA / RE-> client). The most significant examples are: UML diagrams (classes, components, deployment, sequence), user stories when accompanied by technical details and acceptance tests, technical user stories (e.g., stories that directly derive from implementation issues or architecture of the solution and not of functionalities).

It is important to know…

The maturity of the processes adopted within the scope of requirements (or any other) is always reflected in the organizational efficiency of these processes in a project. Regarding the criteria presented at the beginning of this article, the way the processes are executed has direct implications on product / prototype / service presentation with quality and reliability, top organization / management satisfaction and profit. However, the specificities of each project do not suggest the implementation of a single process (“one size fits all”), but rather take into account a set of criteria to “model” the requirements process according to the context in which it operates.

On the other hand, the requirements process must include interactions with clients, through verbal or written communication, formal or informal. Good communication with the client can not be seen only from a “good practice” perspective. It should be an integral part of the organizational vision, with a view to the efficiency of the requirements process, since the management of expectations has implications, not only in the success of the project, in relation to customer satisfaction and loyalty, but also in the reputation and notoriety of the organization.


Referencies:

[1]         Standish Group, “CHAOS Report 2014,” 2014.

[2]         J. M. Fernandes and R. J. Machado, Requirements in Engineering Projects. Springer International Publishing, 2016.

[3]         IIBA, A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge® (BABOK® Guide) Version 2.0. 2009.

 


nuno_santos2

Nuno Santos | Researcher D.I.A EPMQ “Engineering Process Maturity and Quality” @CCG