sf- sp1 – plenary meeting june 14 th and 15 th 2007 - santorini 1 integrated project co-operative...

1SF- SP1 – Plenary Meeting June 14th and 15th 2007 - Santorini

Integrated ProjectIntegrated Project

Co-operative Systems for Road Safety Co-operative Systems for Road Safety

““Smart Vehicles on Smart Roads”Smart Vehicles on Smart Roads”

SP1 – SAFESPOTSP1 – SAFESPOT

In-Vehicle Sensing and PlatformIn-Vehicle Sensing and Platform

Elena Bianco

Centro Ricerche FIAT (Italy), [email protected]

SAFESPOTSAFESPOTSAFESPOTSAFESPOT


SAFESPOT – SP1

Administrative issues


SAFESPOT – SP1


Participants MM for SP1

# Name WP1.1 WP1.2 WP1.3 WP1.4 WP1.5

TOTAL

1 CRF 3.5 7.0 15.0 5.0 30.5 3 REGIENOV 0.0 2.0 3.0 0.0 5.0 4 VOLVO 0.8 2.5 2.5 2.0 7.8 5 BOSCH 2.0 3.0 17.0 4.0 26.0

11 PIAGGIO 0.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 8.0 13 IBEO 0.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 13.0 19 SVDO 0.0 2.0 3.0 1.5 6.5 29 ICCS 0.8 5.0 10.0 4.0 19.8 32 MIRA 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 51 MMSE 0.0 3.0 7.0 1.5 11.5

TOTAL 7.1 35.5 65.5 25.0 133.1

SAFESPOT – SP1

Sub-project Effort (18 months plan)

SIEMENS


SAFESPOT – SP1

BOSCH

All the data reported in the columns Planned and Actual are taken from the Interim Management Report Q5 – cumulative sheet

Justifications are taken from the Interim Activity Report when available

Planned Actual Delta

(Planned – Actual)/Planned * 100

Justification

WP1.1 284 282 - 0.7% No needed

WP1.3 1756 2110 + 20.16% Further development of open source traffic simulator for scenario dependent detection analysis in Java.

Detailed scenario definition and use case analysis with the provided traffic simulator.

Further improvement of the SAFEPROBE architecture design.

Actual version: Guyancourt diagram


SAFESPOT – SP1

CRFAll the data reported in the columns Planned and Actual are taken from the Interim Management Report Q5 – cumulative sheet




Justification

WP1.1 83 80 -3.61% No needed

WP1.3 549 555 -1.09% No needed


SAFESPOT – SP1

REGIENOV





Justification

WP1.3 197 87 - 55.84% Synchronisation of the Data Fusion process with the SAFESPOT global architecture.

Contribution with JAUS approach for perception and fusion of the data.


SAFESPOT – SP1

VOLVO





Justification

WP1.1 89 108 + 21.35% Participated in the SP1 meeting in Pontedera

Participated in the Annual review at EC

Could you please justify better?

WP1.3 257 265 + 3.11% No needed

WP1.4 72 Started the planning of the work within WP1.4 – Implementation for SP1


SAFESPOT – SP1

PIAGGIO





Justification

WP3 294 322 + 9.52% No needed


SAFESPOT – SP1

IBEO





Justification

WP3 586 800 + 36.51 % The preparation of the cooperative pre-data fusion specification required a lot of discussions between the different subprojects which are still ongoing. Especially, the specification of the V2V/ V2I data required for the cooperative pre-data fusion is still in a critical phase and requires additional harmonization work between the subprojects.


SAFESPOT – SP1

SIEMENS





Justification

WP3


SAFESPOT – SP1

ICCS





Justification

WP1 90 90 0 No needed

WP3 954 920 - 3.56 % No needed


SAFESPOT – SP1

MMSE





Justification

WP3 659 688 + 4.4 % No needed


SAFESPOT – SP1

EC review meeting

26-27 March 2007

IP Consensus report

See SF-IP_consensus_report_year1_reviw.pdf

http://bscw.safespot_eu.org/bscw/bscw.cgi/d81909/SF_IP_consensus_report_year1_review.pdf


SAFESPOT – SP1

Recommendation Comment Responsible Due date

IP IP.R1 Add due date on deliverables

Change the deliverable templates, plus check/introduce in all Delivs. Under preparation

Amditis + retrofit all deliverable already structured under preparation

ASAP

IP IP.R2 Common architecture with CVIS; COOPERS, ….

On Going -- but planning to be respected. See common actions and WG

check dates

IP IP.R3 Requirements satisfaction by specification

Necessary to introduce a revised requirement table with a check column

Mokaddem 30/09/2007

IP IP.R4 Synchronization with other projects and back-up

Define what we expect from other projects and define back-up solutions

All - to Brignolo for synthesis

30/06/2007

IP IP.R5 Commitment of non-partners providing contribution to the projects

generate a risk analysis procedure extended also to other risks

Andreone by next CG meeting

IP IP.R6 Other communication solutions

Prepare the answer, but generally SAFESPOT relay on other systems ( e.g. CVIS) when other links are needed

Brignolo by next CG meeting


SAFESPOT – SP1

Recommendation Comment Responsible

Due date

IP IP.R7 Sensors analysis Provide cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of the adopted solutions. The information will be useful also for the global CBA in SP6

Spence 30/06/2007

IP IP.R8 Planning inconsistencies detection

For each SP Split activities and provide a detailed planning up to the prototypes delivery. Needs from other SPs or external devices must be highlighted

all SP leaders 10/07/2007 draft ASAP

IP IP.R9 Dissemination activities monitoring

Provide a tool for this monitoring Amditis 30/06/2007

IP IP.R10 Business aspects,…. Provide support to SP6. Han Zwjinenberg will provide a request table to all SPs and a reference will be appointed in each Sps for each topic.

Zwjinenberg ASAP

IP IP.R11 Scientific dissemination, address IEEE conferences

Diffuse the request to partners SP leaders ASAP

IP IP.R12 Detailed test site planning Contact TS leaders and organize a global kick-off of test sites in first half of September

Brignolo 06/06/2007

IP IP.R13 Physical part demonstration

From planning analysis provide proposal for next review demonstration

SP1 to SP5 leaders 10/07/2007


SAFESPOT – SP1

Recommendation Comment Responsible

Due date

SP1 SP1.R1 Ensure interoperability vs. other SPs

Detailed interface description, already planned Zott Continuous

SP1 SP1.R2 Highlight innovation aspects in next deliverables

Introduce a specific note in each deliverable ( update the template accordingly -- Amditis)

Zott, All SP-Leaders, Amditis

before Deliverables submission

SP1 SP1.R3 Describe clearly the process from requirement to architecture

To be described in SP7 but also in single deliverables?

Mokaddem, all SP leaders 24/07/2007

SP1 SP1.R4 Focus on relevant scenarios

SP1 is already working in that direction Zott Continuous


SAFESPOT – SP1

D1.2.1Vehicle probe use case and test scenarios accepted - somewhat weak

D1.2.2 System Analysis

Not accepted

Irmgard Heiber proposed to

send her a letter with

comments and proposed

actions to the specific points

/ comments made by the

reviewers.

sf- sp1 – plenary meeting june 14 th and 15 th 2007 - santorini 1 integrated project co-operative...

Documents