AZGS | Menu

AZGS at AGU Fall Meeting 2012

December 3-7 in San Francisco

2012 has been an extraordinarily busy and productive year for those of us at the Arizona Geological Survey. As a result, we’ll have a larger than usual presence at the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting in San Francisco, 3-7 December 2012. Fifteen staff members working on an array of projects hammered out seven abstracts, including one oral and six poster presentations; see titles, authors, times and locations, and abstracts below. AZGS Director Lee Allison will also be co-convening two sessions: A Governance Roadmap for Cyberinfrastructure in the Geosciences and Towards a Global Cyberinfrastructure for the Geosciences.

And tune in to Lee Allison’s blog Arizona Geology for reports on AGU activity and events.   

While at AGU, we invite you to visit AZGS-staffed exhibit booths:

  • National Geothermal Data System (NGDS) (booth 104) - with live demonstrations of the search and analytic capabilities of the NGDS. (For more information see our NGDS brochure.)
  • EarthCube (booth 142) – learn how EarthCube is engaging geo, ocean, and atmospheric scientists in the development of community-guided cyberinfrastructure that will transform how scientists share, discover and access data.

AZGS Presentations and Sessions at AGU Fall 2012 Meeting  

Allison, M. Lee, Rowena Davis, F Michael Conway, and Randi Bellassai, “The Virtual Arizona Experience,” American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, December 3, 2012 [poster], 8:00 AM - 12:20 PM, Hall A-C Moscone South

Kim Patten; M L. Allison; Stephen M. Richard; Ryan Clark; Diane Love; Celia Coleman; Christy Caudill; Jordan Matti; Leah Musil; Janel Day; Genhan Chen; Esty Pape, “National Geothermal Data System: State Geological Survey Contributions to Date,” American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, December 3, 2012 [oral], 11:50am-12:05pm, 104 Moscone South

Allison, M. Lee, Co-convener, American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, Technical Session Co-convener, “A Governance Roadmap for Cyberinfrastructure in the Geosciences” December 4, 2012 [posters], Hall A-C Moscone South

Allison, M. Lee, presenter on behalf of the EarthCube Governance Steering Committee, “A Governance Roadmap and Framework for EarthCube,” American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, December 4, 2012 [poster], 8:00 AM - 12:20 PM, Hall A-C Moscone South

Van Daalen, Tirza, and M. Lee Allison (presenter), “OneGeology – a geoscience exemplar for worldwide cyberinfrastructure capacity-building and scientific innovation,” American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, December 4, 2012 [poster], 8:00 AM - 12:20 PM, Hall A-C Moscone South

Pearthree, Genevieve, and M. Lee Allison (presenter), “Mayor of EarthCube: Cities as an Analogue for Cyberinfrastructure,” American Geophysical Union, San Francisco, December 4, 2012 [poster], 8:00 AM - 12:20 PM, Hall A-C Moscone South

Allison, M. Lee, Co-convener, American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, Union Session, “Towards a Global Cyberinfrastructure for the Geosciences,” December 5, 2012 [oral],  10:20 AM - 12:20 PM; 102 Moscone South

Stephen M. Richard; Interoperability Working Group Commission for the Management and Application of Geoscience Information, IUGS, “GeoSciML and EarthResourceML Update, 2012,” American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, December 5, 2012 [poster], 8:00 AM - 12:20 PM, Hall A-C Moscone South

Nils Moosdorf; Stephen M. Richard, “A Lithology Based Map Unit Schema For Onegeology Regional Geologic Map Integration,” American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting, San Francisco, December 7, 2012 [poster], 8:00 AM - 12:20 PM, Hall A-C, Moscone South

 

(top)

The Virtual Arizona Experience

December 3
[poster]
8:00A-12:20P Hall A-C
Moscone South

M. L. Allison1; R. Davis1; F. M. Conway1; R. Bellasai1

1. Arizona Geological Survey, Tucson, AZ, United States.

Body: To commemorate the once-in-a-lifetime event of Arizona's hundredth birthday, the Centennial Commission and the Governor of Arizona envisioned a museum and companion website that would capture the state's history, celebrate its people, and embrace its future. Working with world-renowned museum designers, the state began to seek ideas from across Arizona to create plans for a journey of discovery through science and the humanities. The museum would introduce visitors to some of the people who nurtured the state through its early years and others who are innovating its tomorrows. Showcases would include the resources and experiences that shaped the state's history and are transforming its present day, highlighting the ingenuity that tamed the wild frontier and is envisioning Arizona's next frontiers through science and technology.

The Arizona Experience (www.arizonaexperience.org) was initially intended to serve as the web presence for the physical museum, but as delays occurred with the physical museum, the site has quickly developed an identify of its own as an interactive, multimedia experience, reaching a wider audience with functions that would be difficult or expensive to produce in a museum. As leaders in scientific and technological innovation in the state, the Arizona Geological Survey was tasked with designing and creating the Arizona Experience site. The general themes remain the same; however, the site has added content and applications that are better suited to the online environment in order to create a rich, dynamic supplement to a physical museum experience. The website offers the features and displays of the future museum with the interactive nature and learning environment of the web. This provides an encyclopedic overview of the State of Arizona by subject matter experts in a manner that is free and open to the public and erases socio-economic, political, and physical boundaries.

Over the Centennial Year of 2012 the site will release a new theme and explore the people, land, and innovations that shape the themes. Themes include (in order of release) Celebrates, Mining & Minerals, Biotech & Life Sciences, Sports & Recreation, Energy, Water, Technology & Aerospace, People & Culture, Ranching & Agriculture, Native American Culture, Astronomy, 21st Century Workforce, and a Best of 2012 release. The materials developed for the site come from content matter experts across the state including academic institutions, historical societies, museums, and professional associations. Currently there are over 300 content providers contributing resources, data, and videos to the site.

AZGS interactions with science and technology organizations, associations, and businesses have been critical as we work to engage visitors and industry with the opportunities in Arizona, and translate innovative research and scientific application for a more generalized audience. In addition, we are involving K-12 educators in using the site content and cutting edge technology for developing classroom STEM related content linked to curriculum subject areas.

URL: www.arizonaexperience.org

###

 

(top)

National Geothermal Data System: State Geological Survey Contributions to Date

December 3
[oral]
11:50A-12:05P
104 Moscone South

M. L. Allison1; K. Patten1; S. M. Richard1; R. Clark1; D. Love1; C. Coleman1; C. Caudill1; J. Matti1; L. Musil1; J. Day1; G. Chen1; E. Pape1

ngds brochure

1. Arizona Geological Survey, Tucson, AZ, United States.

Body: In collaboration with the Association of American State Geologists the Arizona Geological Survey is leading the effort to bring legacy geothermal data to the U.S. Department of Energy's National Geothermal Data System (NGDS). NGDS is a national, sustainable, distributed, interoperable network of data and service (application) providers entering its final stages of development. Once completed the geothermal industry, the public, and policy makers will have access to consistent and reliable data, which in turn, reduces the amount of staff time devoted to finding, retrieving, integrating, and verifying information. With easier access to information, the high cost and risk of geothermal power projects (especially exploration drilling) is reduced. This presentation focuses on the scientific and data integration methodology as well as State Geological Survey contributions to date.

The NGDS is built using the U.S. Geoscience Information Network (USGIN) data integration framework to promote interoperability across the Earth sciences community and with other emerging data integration and networking efforts. Core to the USGIN concept is that of data provenance; by allowing data providers to maintain and house their data.

After concluding the second year of the project, we have nearly 800 datasets representing over 2 million data points from the state geological surveys. A new AASG specific search catalog based on popular internet search formats enables end users to more easily find and identify geothermal resources in a specific region. Sixteen states, including a consortium of Great Basin states, have initiated new field data collection for submission to the NGDS. The new field data includes data from at least 21 newly drilled thermal gradient holes in previously unexplored areas.

Most of the datasets provided to the NGDS are being portrayed as Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Web Map Services (WMS) and Web Feature Services (WFS), meaning that the data is compatible with a variety of visualization software. Web services are ideal for the NGDS data for a number of reasons including that they preserve data ownership in that they are read only and new services can be deployed to meet new requirements without modifying existing applications.

URL: www.stategeothermaldata.org

###

 

(top)

A Governance Roadmap and Framework for EarthCube

December 4
[poster]
8:00A-12:20P
Hall A-C
Moscone South

M. L. Allison1

1. Arizona Geological Survey, Tucson, AZ, United States.

Body: EarthCube is a process and an outcome, established to transform the conduct of research through the development of community-guided cyberinfrastructure for the Geosciences as the prototype for potential deployment across all domain sciences. EarthCube aims to create a knowledge management system and infrastructure that integrates all Earth system and human dimensions data in an open transparent, and inclusive manner. EarthCube requires broad community participation in concept, framework, and implementation and must not be hindered by rigid preconceptions.

We discovered widely varying interpretations, expectations, and assumptions about governance among EarthCube participants. Our definition of governance refers to the processes, structure and organizational elements that determine, within an organization or system of organizations, how power is exercised, how stakeholders have their say, how decisions are made, and how decision makers are held accountable.

We have learned, from historic infrastructure case studies, background research on governance and from community feedback during this roadmap process, that other types of large-scale, complex infrastructures, including the Internet, have no central control, administration, or management. No national infrastructure that we examined is governed by a single entity, let alone a single governance archetype. Thus we feel the roadmap process must accommodate a governance system or system of systems that may have a single governing entity, particularly at the start, but can evolve into a collective of governing bodies as warranted, in order to be successful.

A fast-track process during Spring, 2012 culminated in a Governance Roadmap delivered to an NSF-sponsored charrette in June with an aggressive timetable to define and implement a governance structure to enable the elements of EarthCube to become operational expeditiously.

Our goal is to help ensure the realization of this infrastructure sooner, more efficiently, and more effectively, by providing a community endorsed Governance Framework. The Framework, and corresponding community outreach, will maximize engagement of the broader EarthCube community, which in turn will minimize the risks that the community will not adopt EarthCube in its development and final states. The target community includes academia, government, and the private-sector, both nationally and internationally.

Based on community feedback to-date, we compiled and synthesized system-wide governance requirements to draft an initial set of EarthCube Governance functions. These functions will permit us to produce a Governance Framework based on an aggressive community outreach and engagement plan.

URL: http://earthcube.ning.com/group/governance

###

 

(top)

OneGeology – a geoscience exemplar for worldwide cyberinfrastructure capacity-building and scientific innovation

December 4
[poster]
8:00A-12:20P
Hall A-C
Moscone South

M. L. Allison2; T. van Daalen1

1. Geological Survey of the Netherlands, TNO, Utrecht, Netherlands.

2. Arizona Geological Survey, Tucson, AZ, United States.

Body: OneGeology is a trail-blazing global initiative that has helped propel the geosciences into the forefront of cyberinfrastructure development with potentially transformative impacts on scientific and technical innovation across broad areas of society. In the five years since its launch, 117 nations, through their Geological Surveys have signed the OneGeology protocols and nearly half are serving up national geological maps as Web services at varying scales, with the remainder developing those capabilities. In federal systems, states and provinces are increasingly adding higher resolution spatial data to the national contributions to the global system.

The OneGeology concept of a distributed, open-source, Web-service based network has become the archetype for transforming data into knowledge and innovation. This is not only revolutionizing the geosciences but offering opportunities for governments to use these cutting-edge capabilities for broad innovation and capacity building.

Across the globe, communities are facing the same four challenges: put simply, how do we best make data discoverable, shareable, viewable and downloadable, so that the user also has access to consistent data at a national and continental level? The principle of managing scientific and societal data and knowledge where they are generated and are best understood is well established in the geoscience community and can be scaled up and transferred to other domains and sectors of society. The distributed nature of most data sources means the complementary delivery mechanism of Web map services has become equally prevalent in the spatial data community. Together these factors are driving a world-wide revolution in the way spatial information is being disseminated to its users. Industry, academia, and governments are quickly adopting and adapting to this new paradigm and discovering that very modest investments in this emerging field are reaping tremendous returns in national capacity and triggering a wave of innovation and economic development symptomatic of previous deployment of new infrastructures, from transportation networks to the electrical grid to the Internet.

OneGeology continues to implement and deploy critical cyberinfrastructure capabilities in best practices, definitions, and standards on data management. The global adoption of OneGeology is also lowering the barriers to accessing the world's digital resources.

###

 

(top)

The Mayor of EarthCube: Cities as an Analogue for Governing Cyberinfrastructure

December 4
[poster]
8:00A-12:20P
Hall A-C
Moscone South

M. L. Allison1; G. M. Pearthree1; K. Patten1

1. Arizona Geological Survey, Tucson, AZ, United States.

Body: Historical development of national and global infrastructure follows common paths with common imperatives. The nascent development may be led a by champion, innovator, or incubating organization. Once the infrastructure reaches a tipping point and adoption spreads rapidly, the organization and governance evolves in concert. Ultimately, no wide-spread infrastructure (from canals to highways to the electric grid to radio/television, or the Internet) operates with a single overarching governing body.

The NSF EarthCube initiative is a prototype implementation of cyberinfrastructure, using the broad geoscience community as the testbed. Governance for EarthCube is emulating the pattern of other infrastructure, which we argue is a system of systems that can be described by organized complexity, emergent systems, and non-linear thermodynamics.

As we consider governance cyberinfrastructure in the geosciences, we might look to cities as analogs: cities provide services such as fire, police, water, and trash collection. Cities issue permits and often oversee zoning, but much of what defines cities is outside the direct control of city government. Businesses choose whether to locate there, where to operate, and what to build. Residents make similar decisions. State and federal agencies make decisions or impose criteria that greatly affect cities, without necessarily getting agreement from them. City government must thus operate at multiple levels - providing oversight and management of city services, interaction with residents, businesses, and visitors, and dealing with actions and decisions made by independent entities over which they have little or no control.

Cities have a range of organizational and management models, ranging from city managers, councils, and weak to strong mayors, some elected directly, some chosen from councils.

The range and complexity of governance issues in building, operating, and sustaining cyberinfrastructure in the geosciences and beyond, rival those of running a medium to large city. The range of organizational and management structures in meeting community needs and goals are also diverse and may embody a multi-faceted set of governing archetypes, best suited to carry out each of myriad functions.

We envision cyberinfrastructure governance to be a community-driven enterprise empowered to carry out a dynamic set of functions, operating within a set of processes (comparable to a city charter) and guiding principles (constitution).

###

 

(top)

GeoSciML and EarthResourceML Update, 2012

December 5
[poster]
8:00A-12:20P
Hall A-C
Moscone South

S. M. Richard1,2; I. Commission for the Management and Application Inte2

1. Arizona Geological Survey, Tucson, AZ, United States.

2. Interoperability Working Group, Commission for the Management and Application International Union of Geological Sciences, Hannover, Germany.

Body: CGI Interoperability Working Group activities during 2012 include deployment of services using the GeoSciMLPortrayal schema, addition of new vocabularies to support properties added in version 3.0, improvements to server software for deploying services, introduction of EarthResourceML v.2 for mineral resources, and collaboration with the IUSS on a markup language for soils information. GeoSciML and EarthResourceML have been used as the basis for the INSPIRE Geology and Mineral Resources specifications respectively. GeoSciML-Portrayal is an OGC GML simple-feature application schema for presentation of geologic map unit, contact, and shear displacement structure (fault and ductile shear zone) descriptions in web map services. Use of standard vocabularies for geologic age and lithology enables map services using shared legends to achieve visual harmonization of maps provided by different services. New vocabularies have been added to the collection of CGI vocabularies provided to support interoperable GeoSciML services, and can be accessed through http://resource.geosciml.org. Concept URIs can be dereferenced to obtain SKOS rdf or html representations using the SISSVoc vocabulary service. New releases of the FOSS GeoServer application greatly improve support for complex XML feature schemas like GeoSciML, and the ArcGIS for INSPIRE extension implements similar complex feature support for ArcGIS Server. These improved server implementations greatly facilitate deploying GeoSciML services. EarthResourceML v2 adds features for information related to mining activities. SoilML provides an interchange format for soil material, soil profile, and terrain information. Work is underway to add GeoSciML to the portfolio of Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) specifications.

URL: http://resource.geosciml.org

###

 

(top)

A Lithology Based Map Unit Schema For Onegeology Regional Geologic Map Integration

December 7
[poster]
8:00A-12:20P
Hall A-C
Moscone South

S. M. Richard2; N. Moosdorf1

1. IFBM, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.

2. Arizona Geological Survey, Tucson, AZ, United States.

Body: A system of lithogenetic categories for a global lithological map (GLiM, http://www.ifbm.zmaw.de/index.php?id=6460&L=3) has been compiled based on analysis of lithology/genesis categories for regional geologic maps for the entire globe. The scheme is presented for discussion and comment. Analysis of units on a variety of regional geologic maps indicates that units are defined based on assemblages of rock types, as well as their genetic type. In this compilation of continental geology, outcropping surface materials are dominantly sediment/sedimentary rock; major subdivisions of the sedimentary category include clastic sediment, carbonate sedimentary rocks, clastic sedimentary rocks, mixed carbonate and clastic sedimentary rock, colluvium and residuum. Significant areas of mixed igneous and metamorphic rock are also present. A system of global categories to characterize the lithology of regional geologic units is important for Earth System models of matter fluxes to soils, ecosystems, rivers and oceans, and for regional analysis of Earth surface processes at global scale. Because different applications of the classification scheme will focus on different lithologic constituents in mixed units, an ontology-type representation of the scheme that assigns properties to the units in an analyzable manner will be pursued. The OneGeology project is promoting deployment of geologic map services at million scale for all nations. Although initial efforts are commonly simple scanned map WMS services, the intention is to move towards data-based map services that categorize map units with standard vocabularies to allow use of a common map legend for better visual integration of the maps (e.g. see OneGeology Europe, http://onegeology-europe.brgm.fr/ geoportal/ viewer.jsp). Current categorization of regional units with a single lithology from the CGI SimpleLithology (http://resource.geosciml.org/201202/ Vocab2012html/ SimpleLithology201012.html) vocabulary poorly captures the lithologic character of such units in a meaningful way. A lithogenetic unit category scheme accessible as a GeoSciMLportrayal- based OGC Styled Layer Description resource is key to enabling OneGeology (http://oneGeology.org) geologic map services to achieve a high degree of visual harmonization.

###

 

(top)