Hi community!

Hope you have all had a pleasant holiday season. With reporting well underway, hereby a quick overview of what to expect in the next 3 months, building up to present our achievements at the Smart City Expo in Barcelona.

General aim

To summarise the conversations in the past few individual check-ins, working group calls, and work package lead call:

• There is a lot of energy in the consortium, and eagerness to to start building things and producing output.
• There is a need for more clarity in terms of project processes and how we communicate about the project.
• We have experienced some things that don’t work, and are now ready to start formulating this into learnings and approach problems in new ways.
• After a period of divergence (generating new ideas and directions) we should now start converging (concretising and agreeing) towards output.

What to expect?

Here is an attempt to summarise suggested activities for the next few months, with suggestions for who to participate:

261051×278 35.3 KB

(also saved in the drive)

Breakdown of activities

Identifying collaboration potential
Lead: @timvanachte
Support: @h.niesing, @Mikkel @pjppauwels,…
Aim: Reflection on the information exchange about challenges and solutions between Amsterdam, Gent/Digipolis and Aarhus to identify “What information do you need to identify a potential collaboration”
Deliverable: Template/form with information required to make go/no-go decision. Could include eg. “we have budget yes/no”, “we have buy in”, timeline, contact person, screenshots…
Deadline: 27 August - 10 September

Exploring component breakdown
Lead: @Boris
Support: @turegjorup , @HansF, @Amsterdatamas, @timvanachte…
Aim: “How can we unpack existing solutions into components, and understand which components could solve new challenges”
Deliverable: Guidance document + template for partners (with potential solutions) to fill in, in order to then identify common components & micro-services
Deadline: 27 August - 10 September

MVP Visualisation tool
Lead: @pjppauwels
Support: @JoranVD, @timvanachte, @Boris, @Jefwillems, @c.mullie
Aim: Evaluate existing tool and produce a next iteration of the collaboration visualisation tool so it can be experimented with before/during the next partner meeting
Deliverable: MVP with first test users feeding back
Deadline: 3 September - 24 September

Input data for WP3
Lead: @JoranVD
Support: all partners
Aim: Revise previous questionnaire and send out a new request to all partners to collect additional challenges/solutions for SCORE
Deliverable: 5 more entries per partner - 45 in total
Deadline: 24 September - 8 October

IoT registry deliverables
Lead: @h.niesing
Support: @JoranVD & @evdoxia.kouraki
Aim: Use IoT registry as a test case to start producing the first iterations of WP3 and WP5 deliverables related to solution development
Deliverable: (Drafts of) D3.4, D3.6, D3.7, D5.1, D5.2
Deadline: 15 September

Moving from working groups to solution development in WP4
Lead: @h.niesing
Support: All participants in working groups
Aim: Continue sharing information and collaborating to reach go/no-go decisions for existing working groups, and where appropriate, set up development groups & plans and/or start new working groups
Deadline: Open ended

Webinar Series
Lead: @brynskov
Support: @Boris, @dhaval, @borontekata
Aim: Develop and host three webinars that will help build a common understanding in the consortium and prepare partners for the partner meeting. These will focus on ‘Open Source’, ‘Open Data’ and ‘Standardisation and Interoperability’.

Partner teleconference and meeting
Lead: @c.mullie & @Boris
Support: Work package leads
Aim: Prepare and deliver a successful partner meeting in Gent including a preparatory teleconference and workshops run by each work package lead.

These are suggestions, so if you are not sure what to do, what to suggest further activities, are doing something I forgot (apologies!), want to play an active role in any of the tasks mentioned above or have any others doubts - please do make a post below or let me know directly.

Great, Claus. Thanks for the concise and comprehensive summary.

-M

Thank you for this Claus!

I would also like to add an activitiy for WP5 - connected to D5.1.
I would like to undertake an inventory of existing Living Labs in SCORE cities. This would help us to understand where the upcoming solutions will fit best to be tested. My aim is this list to be ready until our next partner meeting in Ghent so each working group will be informed about available LLs. Then each group can discuss and pick up the most suitable ones for their solution testing.

Based on the answers I received last time in February, only Aarhus, Amsterdam, Ghent and Gothenburg have in place living labs/ testbeds. However, I am not fully aware if all of them can be used in SCORE and what is the situation with the rest of the cities. Check the list below.

Therefore, my goal is to get as much information as possible about LLs mentioned below i.e. focus area, structure, ownership, accessibilty, examples of testing and contact person for each of them . This will be a first step for D5.1 “Develop integration & implementation plan”.

Can someone suggest who are the most appropriate person that I can contact from each SCORE city to get this information ? I have posted on SCORE. Community but I did not receive any answer.

SCORE_List%20of%20Living%20Labs1031×593 12.8 KB

Thank you!

Best,
Eva

Hej @h.niesing @JoranVD !

Shall we book a phone meeting soon to discuss the activity “IoT registry deliverables” in coonection to WP5 ? What about this Friday ? morning time ?

Best,
Eva

Hi @pjppauwels !

Who is the most best person to talk with about Ghent Living Lab ? I would like to gather more info about its structure, ownership, accessibility, activities etc. Is it Tom Broeks tom.broeks@stad.gent the right person to approach?

The same questions goes to @brynskov & @Mikkel for Aarhus City Lab, TAPAS and Liveable city lab and @h.niesing for Data Lab in Amsterdam.

What about Aberdeen @Rebecca, Bradford @sydsimpson Bergen @Are , Dordrecht @RikHeinen, Hamburg @nicole.schubbe ??

Thank you in advance for your help
*You can send me personal message on community or email !

Best,
Eva

Dear colleagues,

After a telco with Eva and Joran last Thursday I made some minutes and actions that I will share with the SCORE partners.

We have made a simple criteria doc for solution adoption, (main criteria:
1 Interest and real commitment from SCORE partner,
2 An open system but it goes very slow to get feedback on this.
Now we have to speed this up, a negative decision is also a decision….

We had a Telco about the IoT Amsterdam registry, which is developed now and to be delivered as a first MVP end September.
Jacco is leading this project and we met last Friday to go through this process, see the future developments and possibilities in SCORE with the partners.
We have 2 Amsterdam IoT presentations explaining the reasons for which Amsterdam develops this registry and a document describing the functionality, these are shared on the community otherwise this is redone, just let me know.
Together with Jacco and Boris Hugo will describe the Amsterdam IoT, what can be provided to the SCORE partners in terms of software explanations, support, resources (time & money) etc.

• The partners are requested individually if they have serious request to apply, further develop the IoT registry and are hence willing and able to free resources for that.
• The partners will be approached individually by Amsterdam (cc Gent WP3 lead) to offer them this solution and if no positive response is received before the meeting in Gent in October it is assumed that no interest exists for this solution from this partner.
• In this way we will know if this SCORE solution is of interest to specific SCORE partners.

If approved this approach will then be followed for the other proposed solutions, which were chosen jointly, nut it appears that decision making is more time-consuming and difficult than expected.
Or the city teams do not have the right teams installed, able to define a) contents, b)transferable technology and c)decision making power over the solutions.

I hope to receive your input and feedback!

Greets,

Hugo

Hi all

Related to:
• The exploration of identifying collaboration potential (first item in @claus 's breakdown)
• D3.4 Discussion of solutions
• Partner meeting Ghent
• Building up to Smart City Expo

@pjppauwels and I created a new template for all cities to propose new working groups, especially useful for the kind of solution oriented working groups we are seeing, that are based on existing solutions or new to be build solutions/components in cities.

We believe the template contains the necessary information (not too broad and not too narrow/detailed) for a city to announce an existing / new project in the city that is identified as having “SCORE potential”. SCORE potential being the potential to have (parts of) it co-developed transnationally in an open source & open linked data manner. We wanted it to cover the first couple of core questions that such a working group proposal raises, in order to collect interest from other cities. Ofcourse we also attempted to include lessons learned from SCORE so far.

We preferred to immediately test it, so we applied it to 4 working group proposals from Ghent which posted in https://score.community/c/working-groups/new-working-groups

• Challenge visualiser and explorer – template
• Real-time disability underground parking information – template
• Check-je-huis / Check-your-house – template
• Linked Open Data Taxonomy Manager – template

We’re looking forward to:
• your reaction on our new proposals
• your feedback on the actual structure of this template, what’s missing?
• other proposed working groups

Hi @timvanachte

Feedback on the template - perhaps include something on ‘common ambition’ for partners - with possible responses ranging from a) collective analysis of challenge and unpack it into possible approaches for solutions, b) compare approaches to solutions, c) identify and develop common components, d) develop common solution?

Perhaps also include some notion of timeframe - when you would like to achieve a certain aim by.