UrbanDigitalTwinsPilot



Urban Digital Twins Interoperability Pilot: Call for Participation (CFP)

1. Introduction

The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) calls for proposals to participate in an Urban Digital Twin Interoperability Pilot (UDTIP), sponsored by the Korea Land and Housing Agency. Over half of the world’s population lives in cities. Innovations in the planning, design and management of urban environments are essential to enable their residents to live healthier, safer, happier lives and shape inclusive, sustainable, resilient urban futures. Geospatial information and technologies are essential building blocks for innovations across applications from promoting active transport, to urban power grid monitoring, to planning an infrastructure upgrade. Urban Digital Twins provide an integrated platform for up-to-date location-aware data, process-based modeling, and visualization, creating a rich environment for collaborative, data-driven work in urban contexts. The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) Urban Digital Twin Interoperability Pilot (UDTIP) will build a consortium of partners to identify opportunities to improve geospatial data interoperability within Urban Digital Twins to meet the needs of the diverse organizations engaged in building present and future urban communities.

2. Pilot Project Background

A digital twin is in essence a 6D (3 spatial axes, one phenomenon time axis, one valid time axis, one "what-if" axis) geospatial model of a portion and aspect of the biophysical-social world combined with one or more workflows that set / update the objects and attributes of the model. The real-world interfaces (sensors, surveys) may or may not themselves form part of the model. The available output of the digital twin is any information contained within the model itself.

As a technological ideal, digital twins present a number of challenges, particularly in terms of spatial information interoperability. Two challenges in particular have been addressed but not yet solved through OGC initiatives and standardization:

  1. A digital twin requires the integration of persistent information, for example digital models of buildings and urban infrastructure, with dynamic information such as the trajectories of people and vehicles or environmental properties such as noise or air quality. The 3D-IoT Pilot conducted by OGC with support from LH explored several approaches to accomplishing this integration through the use of OGC standards and interoperability architectures. The persistent and dynamic information elements typically derive from different sources, managed by different communities using different systems. Timely integration of these elements is both a technical and semantic challenge, for example assuring that a given sensor is providing accurate and timely estimates for a particular property of a particular persistent feature such as a street intersection or building hallway.

  2. It is not feasible for a single digital twin to represent all of the appearance and behavior of the real world everywhere. In order to provide a broader and more accurate representation, it is necessary for individual digital twin models and systems to interoperate, to exchange information with each other as well as with systems that provide sensor observations and/or analytical processing. In order to coordinate these interchanges, any system of digital twin systems coordination needs to be based on a common spatial-temporal framework that aligns not only the persistent elements of each twin, but also the sensors and other sources of dynamic information. Issues addressed particularly in OGC Testbeds include API’s for system-to-system interchange of dynamic information (e.g. moving features), services for discovery across distributed systems, and standardization of training data across multiple machine learning models.

Existing OGC API’s do not directly address all of the requirements posed by digital twin interoperability needs. The formulation of OGC API elements as “building blocks”, however, presents the opportunity to assemble existing API building blocks into a more appropriate “Digital Twin API” interface specifically directed at those needs. The specification and prototyping of such an interface would be a valuable contribution to the advancement of urban systems towards the digital twin ideal.

Fig1
Figure 1. Conceptual Diagram of the network of interfaces and processes connected with Digital Twin Platforms for Smart Built Environments



3. Urban Digital Twin Interoperability Pilot Objectives

The objectives of the Urban Digital Twin Interoperability Pilot are to improve interoperability of geospatial data and analyses within digital twins and lay the foundations for better interoperability between Digital Twins developed for separate applications. In detail it aims to:

  • Develop a Pilot plan to implement digital twin interoperability scenarios and a supporting standard digital twin API for Urban noise analysis and Situational analysis of geo-referenced still and moving imagery for use cases at a Smart City.

  • Prototyping open standard interfaces for:

    • Data collection from the real world to an Urban Digital Twin

    • Data exchanges between UDTIP and analytic processes

    • Presentation of analytic processing results

  • Collaboratively exploring best tools and representations through co-design with scientists, technology developers, and decision-makers to develop, test, and validate advanced interoperability and integration methods for Urban Digital Twins.

3.1. Benefits to the stakeholder community

The outcomes of the UDTIP initiative will benefit not only its sponsors and direct Participants, but the broader stakeholder community through:

  • The creation of a shared forum for technical experts, domain experts, users of geospatial data and systems, and community stakeholders across the diverse applications related to the planning, management, and future development, and living in urban places.

  • Building an integrated source of information on key technologies, standards, and data critical for geospatially-enabled applications of Urban Digital Twins.

  • Providing insights into where the geospatial data and infrastructure needs of Smart Camps and Smart Cities stakeholders intersect and diverge.

  • Making connections between the Smart City and UN Smart Camp communities and the communities engaged in related OGC initiatives to seed future collaborations and create opportunities for new partnerships.

4. Benefits to Participants

This initiative provides an outstanding opportunity to connect with stakeholders across the Urban ecosystem, engage with the latest research on geospatial system design, concept development, and rapid prototyping with organizations (Sponsors & Participants) across the globe. The initiative provides a business opportunity for stakeholders to mutually define, refine, and evolve service interfaces and protocols in the context of hands-on experience and feedback. The OGC Urban Digital Twins Pilot will contribute towards an open, multi-level infrastructure that integrates data, technologies, requirements and objectives from diverse contexts and application domains. It will contribute to the technology and governance stack that enables the integration of data including historical observations, real time sensing data, reanalysis, forecasts and future projections. The Sponsor, the Land and Housing Agency of Korea, are supporting this vision with cost-sharing funds to partially offset the costs associated with development, engineering, and demonstration of these outcomes. This offers selected Participants a unique opportunity to recoup a portion of their initiative expenses. OGC COSI Program Participants benefit from:

  • Access to funded research & development

  • Reduced development costs, risks, and lead-time of new products or solutions

  • Close relationships with potential customers

  • First-to-market competitive advantage on the latest geospatial innovations

  • Influence on the development of global solutions and standards

  • Partnership opportunities within our community of experts

  • Broader market reach via the recognition that OGC standards bring.

5. Master Schedule

The following table details the major Initiative milestones and events for the Urban Digital Twins Interoperability Pilot. Dates are subject to change.

Table 1. Master Schedule
Milestones Project Month Description

M01

3 May 2024

Pilot Call for Participation Opens

M02

14 May 2024

Bidders Webinar

M03

3 June 2024

Pilot Call for Participation Closes

M04

25-26 June 2024

Pilot Kickoff

M05

20 December 2024

Draft Engineering Report

M06

21 February 2025

Final Engineering Report and operating prototype

During the pilot, virtual weekly check-ins will be held for participants to discuss progress, highlight challenges, and share views on key issues. Participants in meetings will contribute to the pilot’s final report by providing quick comments after each meeting, capturing discussion and lessons learned which will complement the technical outcomes included in the report.

6. Participation

6.1. Who can participate

The OGC welcomes proposals to participate in its Initiatives from organizations and individuals active in the development, management, and use of geospatial data, technologies and systems. Proposers may be active in industry, government (national, regional, local), research, non-profit, community, or other sectors. Past participants have included providers of services and platforms, modelers, end users of platforms and data, researchers, and other stakeholders in relevant domains.

You do not need to be a member of the Open Geospatial Consortium to propose to participate. If your organization’s proposal is selected, you or your organization must become an OGC member if not already one. This is to ensure all participants have equal access to the tools and documentation developed and shared throughout the project phase.

6.2. How to participate

The UDTIP is designed to enable interested organizations to participate in a range of ways, from simply engaging in the co-design process without committing any resources other than the participant’s time, to providing funding, in-kind or paid services, or providing a resource such as a dataset or access to infrastructure. Key mechanisms for engagement include:

  • Provide technical expertise Commit staff time to the Pilot to regularly join meetings, develop data and software components, test and evaluate implementations, or produce documentation. Contribute your organization or community’s perspective on how tools should be designed and what would meet your needs as a user by actively participating in workshops and co-design exercises. Add your perspective as a technical or domain expert by providing feedback on the design and implementation of the architecture.

  • Provide a use case Share a real world case study which can be used to inform the development of the UDTIP architecture and demonstrate how it can be used to create more FAIR processes and workflows, leading to better outcomes for users. Sample use cases may be provided when you make your proposal with the expectation that these would be refined in consultation with other UDTIP Pilot team members.

  • Provide data or tools Make an contribution of existing data, platforms, research or other resources (e.g. models, digital infrastructure components) to support the Pilot.

7. Technical Objectives

This section identifies the technical objectives of the UDTIP Initiative and the corresponding activities and deliverables participants make a proposal (bid) to undertake in order to help achieve the Initiative’s aims. These activities and deliverables constitute the major part of each participant’s contribution to the UDTIP Initiative, together with their contribution to Engineering Reports and other materials capturing the process.

It is expected that proposals to achieve these technical objectives will build on and refer to the OGC standards baseline, i.e., the complete set of member-approved Abstract Specifications, Standards including Profiles and Extensions, and Community Practices, where relevant.

Fig2
Figure 2. Conceptual Diagram of analytical, visualization, and data modules connected through a smart city platform with suggested potential OGC API connection mechanisms.



8. Technical Objectives and Deliverables

  1. TO1:Urban traffic noise modeling to support urban planning and management The capacity to generate predictive noise models based on predicted traffic patterns and/or historic traffic and traffic noise data will enable the use of digital twins for several aspects of urban planning and city management. Relevant aspects include the design and management of road networks, the placement of traffic control mechanisms e.g. lights and detours, and traffic volume by vehicle type e.g. passenger cars and buses and trucks, and road pavement type e.g. aspahalt and concrete, and the planning of locations of buildings and siting of public facilities where noise levels should be considered. Participants working on this deliverable (D100) will produce a design of a prototype API- and OGC standards enabled workflow to enable reusable and reproducible execution of a noise simulation integrating IoT sensor data and 3D built environment models within an Urban Digital Twin. (D100) This deliverable will include documentation of the workflow carried out for the following tasks:

    1. Production of a parametric urban 3D noise model and supporting workflow

      1. The noise model and workflow will incorporate 3D city models, provided by the sponsors, typical of those used in the planning phase of a Smart City

      2. The workflow will include steps for conversion from BIM/CAD to CityGML 2.0

      3. The noise modeling workflow will include the conversion of estimated traffic profiles to synthetic noise data, providing a mechanism for use of traffic profile data as an input. Samples of data will be provided by the sponsors.

      4. The noise modeling workflow will include the direct integration of noise sensor reading data for a set of given points. Synthetic sensor data may be used. Use of the SensorThings API standard is encouraged for this aspect of D100.

    2. Integration of the noise model and 3D city model within a Digital Twin Platform capable of:

      1. Receiving updates to the 3D built environment model

      2. Receiving noise levels and additional data at given points

      3. Communicating with urban noise analysis module

      4. Providing analysis results to the visualization module described in Technical Objective 4 (D104)

      5. Exchanging data and interoperating with the UDT described in Technical Objective 2 (D101/D102) using the mechanism described in Technical Objective 3 (D103)

  2. TO2: Detection and identification of unwanted objects (obstacles and unauthorized dumping) in SmartCity contexts (D101 and D102) The ability to use sensors and cameras to support the management of built-up environments is critical to the ongoing operations of Smart Cities. In the context of cities, it is essential to detect obstacles to mobility. While systems to alert people to the presence of alterations to road vehicle mobility, including the cause, are operational, the detection of unwanted objects acting as obstacles to active transport (walking, jogging, cycling) is not well developed. Equally, the capability to detect unwanted objects, including illegal trash dumps and abandoned objects, is under-developed. The participants on these deliverables will collaborate to develop a prototype system and supporting workflow to:

    1. Enable Camera Imagery Interoperability (D101) for training / testing / validation for ML workflows (D101). The prototype system and workflow must allow Geo-Referenced Camera Images produced by multiple sensor types (those typically used to capture imagery, still or video, from moving vehicles) to be prepared for use in ML feature detection and scene understanding workflows. The multi-source image sets are expected to maintain essential metadata to enable traceability. Essential metadata for this deliverable includes GeoPose 1.0 for camera position and FoV and Trajectories documented following the Moving Features standard.

    2. Enable Geo-AI Analysis Interoperability (D102). Design a prototype API and OGC standards-enabled workflow to enable reusable and reproducible execution of an ML-driven image-based object detection within an Urban Digital Twin. The focus of the ML training should support the overall technical objective. The ML-driven system should, wherever possible, use the input imagery formats and metadata formulations developed by the D101 participants. The training data and metadata outputs should be provided following the TrainDML: TrainingDML for AI standard.

    3. The outputs of D101 and D102 should be interoperable with the Urban Digital Twin described in Technical Objective 1 (D100) using the mechanism described in Technical Objective 3 (D103)

  3. TO3: Inter-module Interoperability to support portability and reuse for diverse UDT applications (D103). Enabling the creation of Urban Digital Twins for a range of specific applications and promoting portability and reuse of their modules requires development of explicit mechanisms for UDT module interoperability, enabled by standards. The participants working on this technical objective will collaborate with those on D100, D101 and D102 to deliver:

    1. Inter-module Interoperability (D103). Design of a prototype for API- and OGC standards enabled data flows between Digital Twin modules built for different applications, using the two applications in this pilot as an exemplar use case.

    2. The participants working on this deliverable are responsible for developing the functionality to coordinate exchange of data, metadata and code as required between the data, analytic, and visualization modules produced for the UDTIP.

    3. Participants working on this deliverable are expected to report on any limits of OGC standards for supporting this application within their Engineering Report contribution. Planning for generalized UDT interoperability beyond the specific use cases in this Pilot is encouraged.

  4. TO4: Communication and Engagement with the community of practice involved in designing, developing, operating, and using urban digital twins is essential to ensuring the outcomes of the Pilot are fit for purpose, well aligned with real user needs, and have a path to uptake. The participants working on this technical objective will collaborate with all other participants to:

    1. Produce a Visualization (D104) of results to convey the value of interoperability to external stakeholders.

    2. Lead Stakeholder Engagement (D105). Active engagement throughout the Pilot process is expected with the Land and Housing Agency of Korea, the UN GSC, and wider stakeholder community outwith the Participant organizations to gather information on their priorities and requirements as users and engage them in evaluation of the prototypes. Communities engaged may include a range of organizations interested in digital technologies for urban planning and management, organizations using urban digital twins, and organizations developing digital twins in other contexts. This engagement could take the form of user needs assessments, paper-based design workshops, prototype reviews, or other activities.

9. Deliverables Summary

  • D001 Engineering Report – Co-editorship of an Engineering Report capturing key results and experiences from this project. The Engineering Report will contain a plain language executive summary to clearly outline the motivations, goals, and critical outcomes of this Initiative. It will include sections on any interoperability gap analysis; usability of data products for specific use cases (e.g. in support of the urban planning); and integration of complementary data (e.g. statistics on human population, building materials attributes). The report will be produced in collaboration with OGC staff.

  • D100 Noise Modeling Interoperability Design of a prototype API and OGC standards enabled workflow to enable reusable and reproducible execution of a noise simulation integrating IoT sensor data and 3D built environment models within an Urban Digital Twin.

  • D101 Camera Imagery Interoperability for training / testing / validation for ML workflows.

  • D102 Geo-AI Analysis Interoperability Design of a prototype API and OGC standards enabled workflow to enable reusable and reproducible execution of a ML-driven image-based object detection within an Urban Digital Twin.

  • D103 Inter-module Interoperability Design of a prototype for API and OGC standards enabled data flows between Digital Twin modules built for different applications, using the two applications in this pilot as an exemplar.

  • D104 Visualization of results to convey the value of interoperability to external stakeholders.

  • D105 Stakeholder Engagement with LH, the UN GSC, and wider stakeholder community outwith the Participant organizations to gather information on their priorities and requirements as users and engage them in evaluation of the prototypes.

15223 tasks deliverables
Figure 3. Overview of Technical Objectives and Deliverables

10. Collective Engineering Report

Each participant in the UDTIP will contribute to a collective Engineering Report (D001) documenting their contributions to the collaborative solutions developed during the pilot. The report will reflect the main threads of the discussions held during the weekly meetings. In their contributions to the report, participants will be asked to describe the implemented process, report about successes and failures, and provide an overview of additional data, processing capacities, or other currently missing elements that would improve the use case implementation in future. An important element of this pilot is the documentation of what does not work.

Participant(s) co-leading editorial work will:

  • Maintain and regularly update drafts of the report in a github repository, eventually using a metanorma template

  • Integrate contributions from all participants into the report and help synthesize the main discussion points regularly after each meeting.

  • Format text and graphic files according to the metanorma template to produce the final report.

  • Collaborate closely with the coordinator of the pilot (OGC staff) to produce the final report.

11. OGC COSI Program Initiative

This initiative is being conducted under the OGC Collaborative Solutions and Innovation (COSI) Program. The OGC COSI Program aims to solve the biggest challenges in location. Together with OGC-members, the COSI Team is exploring the future of climate, disasters, autonomy and robots, outer space systems interoperability, defense and intelligence, and more.

The OGC COSI Program is a forum for OGC members to solve the latest and hardest geospatial challenges via a collaborative and agile process. OGC members (sponsors and technology implementers) come together to solve problems, produce prototypes, develop demonstrations, provide best practices, and advance the future of standards. Since 1999, more than 100 funded initiatives have been executed - from small interoperability experiments run by an OGC working group to multi-million dollar testbeds with more than three hundred OGC-member participants.

OGC COSI initiatives promote rapid prototyping, testing, and validation of technologies, such as location standards or architectures. Within an initiative, OGC Members test and validate draft specifications to address geospatial interoperability requirements in real-world scenarios, business cases, and applied research topics. This approach not only encourages rapid technology development, but also determines the technology maturity of potential solutions and increases the technology adoption in the marketplace.

The OSPD is beginning to create a persistent platform whose core components include a workflow-building application that connects multiple open science platforms, an experimentation environment for trialing platforms and workflows, a training and education area, and result in visualization environments. The aim is not to develop another analytical or research platform, but to improve the experience of users of multiple platforms, leverage the power of existing platforms, provide training on workflows across multiple platforms, and experiment with advanced visualization across whole workflows, as depicted in the Figure below.

Fig3
Figure 4. Conceptual Diagram of the Open Science Persistent Demonstrator



Participants in the UDTIP pilot are encouraged to consider engaging in future phases of the Open Science Persistent Demonstrator (OSPD) to integrate platforms, services and other technologies developed through the UDTIP into the OSPD.

12.1. Information on bidding, selection, and key requirements

Responding to the Call For Participation (CFP):

To respond to the CFP as a bidder, you will submit an Online Form in which you describe your proposal. This proposal should include your (the bidder’s) technical solution(s) for each deliverable, cost sharing request(s) for funding, and proposed in-kind contribution(s) to the initiative.

The CFP includes a description of the deliverables against which bidders may submit proposals. Bidders may address technical deliverables, such as implementing a component of an infrastructure, or participatory deliverables, such as contributing to meetings and to writing documents. The timeline for completion of the deliverables is set out in the Master Schedule.

Proposal Evaluations will take place on a per-deliverable basis. Therefore, it is important that all proposals should all be entered into the form on a per-deliverable basis.

Proposals in response to the CFP should be submitted by the deadline listed in the Master Schedule.

Questions and Requests for clarification: Bidders have the opportunity to submit questions about the CFP. Questions can be submitted using this Form. Bidders who cannot access the Form should send an email to udtip-questions@ogc.org. The Bidders Q&A Webinar will be held on the date listed in the Master Schedule. The webinar is open to the public, but anyone wishing to attend must register using the provided link. Questions are due on the date listed in the Master Schedule Question submitters will remain anonymous, and answers will be compiled and published in the CFP clarifications.

After the initial Q&A Webinar bidders may submit further questions using the same Form. Again, question submitters will remain anonymous. Ongoing updates and answers to questions will be added to the CFP Corrigenda Table and the CFP Clarifications Table. The HTML version of the CFP will be updated automatically and appear at the same URL as the original version. The PDF file online will be updated following each revision. You should download a new copy for offline work regularly to ensure you are referring to the latest version.

Participant Selection and Agreements: Following the submission deadline, OGC will evaluate received proposals, review recommendations with Sponsors, and negotiate Participation Agreement (PA) contracts, including statements of work (SOWs). Participant selection will be complete once PA contracts have been signed with all Participants.

Required attendance at the Kickoff: The Kickoff is a meeting where Participants, guided by the Initiative Architect, will refine the Initiative architecture and settle on specifics to be used as a baseline for prototype component interoperability. Participants will be required to attend the Kickoff, including breakout sessions, and will be expected to use these breakouts to collaborate with other Participants and confirm intended interface Designs.

Required attendance at Regular Telecons and Meetings: After the Kickoff, participants will meet frequently via weekly telecons (videoconferencing) and in person at OGC Member Meetings. As a minimum, participants are required to attend virtual meetings regularly.

Requirements for Development of Deliverables: Development of Components, Engineering Reports, Change Requests, and other deliverables will commence during or immediately after the Kickoff meeting.

Under the Participation Agreement contracts, ALL Participants will be responsible for contributing content to the documents / ERs, particularly regarding their component implementation experiences, findings, and future recommendations. Each participant will be required to provide at least one bullet point per week to the ER on work, progress, technical conversations and decisions, etc., while the ER Editor will be the primary compiler and author on the shared sections such as the Executive Summary. The ER editor is further responsible for capturing all design decisions and lessons learned during the whole initiative execution phase. Compiling the whole report at the end of the initiative does not work!

More detailed deliverable descriptions appear under Types of Deliverables.

Final Summary Reports, Demonstration Event and Other Stakeholder Meetings: Participant Final Summary Reports will constitute the close of funded activity. Further development work might take place to prepare and refine assets to be shown at webinars, demonstration events, and other meetings.

Assurance of Service Availability: Participants selected to implement service components must maintain availability for the sponsors for a period of no less than six months after the Participant Final Summary Report milestone.

Demonstrator Maintenance: OGC staff may select a limited number of demonstrators each year for maintenance beyond the period of performance of the Pilot to enable ongoing public availability. The conditions and practical arrangements for this support will be arranged on a case-by-case basis with selected participants.

Appendix A: Pilot Organization and Execution

A.1. Initiative Policies and Procedures

This initiative will be conducted within the policy framework of OGC’s Bylaws and Intellectual Property Rights Policy ("IPR Policy"), as agreed to in the OGC Membership Agreement, and in accordance with the OGC COSI Program Policies and Procedures and the OGC Principles of Conduct, the latter governing all related personal and public interactions. Specifically:

Several key requirements are summarized below for ready reference:

  • Each selected Participant will agree to notify OGC staff if it is aware of any claims under any issued patents (or patent applications) which would likely impact an implementation of the specification or other work product which is the subject of the initiative. Participant need not be the inventor of such patent (or patent application) in order to provide notice, nor will Participant be held responsible for expressing a belief which turns out to be inaccurate. Specific requirements are described under the "Necessary Claims" clause of the IPR Policy.

  • Each selected Participant will agree to refrain from making any public representations that draft Engineering Report (ER) content has been endorsed by OGC before the ER has been approved in an OGC Technical Committee (TC) vote.

  • Each selected Participant will agree to provide more detailed requirements for its assigned deliverables, and to coordinate with other initiative Participants, at the Kickoff event.

A.2. Initiative Roles

The roles generally played in any OGC COSI Program initiative include Sponsors, Bidders, Participants, Observers, and the COSI Program Team. Explanations of the roles are provided in Tips for New Bidders.

The COSI Team for this Initiative will include an Initiative Director and an Initiative Architect. Unless otherwise stated, the Initiative Director will serve as the primary point of contact (POC) for the OGC.

The Initiative Architect will work with Participants and Sponsors to ensure that Initiative activities and deliverables are properly assigned and performed. They are responsible for scope and schedule control, and will provide timely escalation to the Initiative Director regarding any high-impact issues or risks that might arise during execution.

A.3. Types of Deliverables

All activities in this pilot will result in a Deliverable. These Deliverables generally take the form of a persistent demonstrator capability, Documents or Component Implementations.

A.4. Documents

Engineering Reports (ER) and Change Requests (CR) will be prepared in accordance with OGC published templates. Engineering Reports will be delivered by posting on the (members-only) OGC Pending directory when complete and the document has achieved a satisfactory level of consensus among interested participants, contributors and editors. Engineering Reports are the formal mechanism used to deliver results of the COSI Program to Sponsors and to the OGC Standards Program for consideration by way of Standards Working Groups and Domain Working Groups.

Tip

A common ER Template will be used as the starting point for each document. Various template files will contain requirements such as the following (from the 1-summary.adoc file):

The Executive Summary shall contain a business value statement that should describe the value of this Engineering Report to improve interoperability, advance location-based technologies or realize innovations.

Ideas for meeting this particular requirement can be found in the CFP Background as well as in previous ER content such as the business case in the SELFIE Executive Summary.

Document content should follow this OGC Document Editorial Guidance (scroll down to view PDF file content). File names for documents posted to Pending should follow this pattern (replacing the document name and deliverable ID): OGC UDTIP24 DocumentName (D001). For ERs, the words Engineering Report should be spelled out in full.

A.4.1. Component Implementations

Component Implementations include services, clients, datasets, and tools. A service component is typically delivered by deploying an endpoint via an accessible URL. A client component typically exercises a service interface to demonstrate interoperability. Implementations should be developed and deployed in all threads for integration testing in support of the technical architecture.

IMPORTANT

Under the Participation Agreement contracts, ALL Participants will be responsible for contributing content to the ERs, particularly regarding their component implementation experiences, findings, and future recommendations. The ER Editor will be the primary author on shared sections such as the Executive Summary.

Component implementations are often used as part of outreach demonstrations near the end of the timeline. To support these demonstrations, component implementations are required to include Demo Assets. For clients, the most common approach to meet this requirement is to create a video recording of a user interaction with the client. These video recordings may optionally be included in a new YouTube Playlist on the OGC YouTube channel.

Tip

Videos to be included in a new YouTube Playlist should follow these instructions: Upload the video recording to the designated Portal directory (to be provided), and include the following metadata in the Description field of the upload dialog box:

  • A Title that starts with "OGC UDTIP:", keeping in mind that there is a 100-character limit [if no title is provided, we’ll insert the file name],

  • Abstract: [1-2 sentence high-level description of the content],

  • Author(s): [organization and/or individuals], and

  • Keywords: [for example, OGC, UDTIP24, machine learning, analysis ready data, etc.].

Since server components often do not have end-user interfaces, participants may instead support outreach by delivering static UML diagrams, wiring diagrams, screenshots, etc. In many cases, the images created for an ER will be sufficient as long as they are suitable for showing in outreach activities such as Member Meetings and public presentations. A server implementer may still choose to create a video recording to feature their organization more prominently in the new YouTube playlist. Another reason to record a video might be to show interactions with a "developer user" (since these interactions might not appear in a client recording for an "end user").

Tip

Demo-asset deliverables are slightly different from Technology Interoperability Experiment (TIE) testing deliverables. The latter don’t necessarily need to be recorded (though they often appear in a recording if the TIE testing is demonstrated as part of one of the recorded weekly telecons).

A.5. Proposals & Proposal Evaluation

Proposals are expected to be brief, broken down by deliverable, and precisely addressing the work items of interest to the bidder. Details of the proposal submission process are provided under the General Proposal Submission Guidelines.

Proposals will be evaluated based on criteria in two areas: technical and management/cost.

A.5.1. Technical Evaluation Criteria

  • Concise description of each proposed solution and how it contributes to achievement of the particular deliverable requirements described in the Technical Architecture,

  • Overall quality and suitability of each proposed solution, and

  • Where applicable, whether the proposed solution is OGC-compliant.

Management/Cost Evaluation Criteria
  • Willingness to share information and work in a collaborative environment, Contribution toward Sponsor goals of enhancing availability of standards-based offerings in the marketplace,

  • Feasibility of each proposed solution using proposed resources, and

  • Proposed in-kind contribution in relation to proposed cost-share funding request.

Note that all Participants are required to provide some level of in-kind contribution (i.e. costs for which no cost-share compensation has been requested). As a rough guideline, a proposal should include at least one dollar of in-kind contribution for every dollar of cost-share compensation requested. All else being equal, higher levels of in-kind contributions will be considered more favorably during evaluation. Participation may also take place by purely in-kind contributions (no cost-share request at all).

Once the proposals have been evaluated and cost-share funding decisions have been made, the COSI Team will begin notifying Bidders of their selection to enter negotiations to become and initiative Participant. Each selected bidder will enter into a Participation Agreement (PA), which will include a Statement of Work (SOW) describing the assigned deliverables.

A.5.2. Reporting

Participants will be required to report the progress and status of their work; details will be provided during contract negotiation. Additional administrative details such as invoicing procedures will also be included in the contract.

Monthly Reporting

The COSI Team will provide monthly progress reports to Sponsors. Ad hoc notifications may also occasionally be provided for urgent matters. To support this reporting, each testbed participant must submit (1) a Monthly Technical Report and (2) a Monthly Business Report by the first working day on or after the 3rd of each month. Templates and instructions for both of these report types will be provided.

The purpose of the Monthly Business Report is to provide initiative management with a quick indicator of project health from each participant’s perspective. The COSI Team will review action item status on a weekly basis with assigned participants. Initiative participants must remain available for the duration of the timeline so these contacts can be made.

Participant Final Summary Reports

Each Participant should submit a Final Summary Report by the milestone indicated in the Master Schedule. These reports should include the following information:

  1. Briefly summarize Participant’s overall contribution to the Initiative (for an executive audience),

  2. Describe, in detail, the work completed to fulfill the Participation Agreement Statement of Work (SOW) items (for a more technical audience), and

  3. Present recommendations on how we can better manage future OGC COSI Program initiatives.

This report may be in the form of email text or an attached document (at the Participant’s discretion).

Appendix B: Proposal Submission

B.1. General Proposal Submission Guidelines

This section presents general guidelines for submitting a CFP proposal. Detailed instructions for submitting a response proposal using the Bid Submission Form web page can be found in the Step-by-Step Instructions below.

Important

Please note that the content of the "Proposed Contribution" text box in the Bid Submission Form will be accessible to all Stakeholders and should contain no confidential information such as labor rates.

Similarly, no sensitive information should be included in the Attached Document of Explanation.

Proposals must be submitted before the deadline indicated in the Master Schedule.

Tip

Non-members or individual members should make a note regarding their intent to join OGC on the Organizational Background page of the Bid Submission Form and include their actual Letter of Intent as part of an Attached Document of Explanation.

Information submitted in response to this CFP will be accessible to OGC and Sponsor staff members. This information will remain in the control of these stakeholders and will not be used for other purposes without prior written consent of the Bidder. Once a Bidder has agreed to become a Participant, they will be required to release proposal content (excluding financial information) to all initiative stakeholders. Sensitive information other than labor-hour and cost-share estimates should not be submitted.

Bidders will be selected for cost share funds on the basis of adherence to the CFP requirements and the overall proposal quality. The general initiative objective is to inform future OGC standards development with findings and recommendations surrounding potential new specifications. Each proposed deliverable should formulate a path for (1) producing executable interoperable prototype implementations meeting the stated CFP requirements and (2) documenting the associated findings and recommendations. Bidders not selected for cost share funds may still request to participate on a purely in-kind basis.

Bidders should avoid attempts to use the initiative as a platform for introducing new requirements not included in Technical Architecture. Any additional in-kind scope should be offered outside the formal bidding process, where an independent determination can be made as to whether it should be included in initiative scope or not. Out-of-scope items could potentially be included in another OGC COSI initiative.

Each selected Participant (even one not requesting any funding) will be required to enter into a Participation Agreement contract ("PA") with the OGC. The reason this requirement applies to purely in-kind Participants is that other Participants will likely be relying upon the delivery of their work. Each PA will include a Statement of Work ("SOW") identifying specific Participant roles and responsibilities.

B.2. Questions and Clarifications

Once the original CFP has been published, ongoing updates and answers to questions can be found in the CFP Corrigenda Table and the CFP Clarifications Table

Bidders may submit questions using the Form or by emailing udtip-questions@ogc.org. Question submitters will remain anonymous, and answers will be regularly compiled and published in the CFP clarifications.

A Bidders Q&A Webinar will be held on the date listed in the Master Schedule. The webinar is open to the public, but anyone wishing to attend must register using the provided link. Questions are due on the date listed in the Master Schedule.

B.3. Proposal Submission Procedures

The process for a Bidder to complete a proposal is set out in the online Bid Submission Form.

The Bid Submission form will be made available shortly after the CFP release. It will include a series of web forms, one for each deliverable of interest. Bidders should remember to submit one form for each deliverable for which they wish to submit a proposal.

New users must create an account before completing a form.

Once an account is established, the user may log in and will be taken to a home page indicating the "Status of Your Proposal." The user can return to this page at any time by clicking the OGC logo in the upper left corner.

Any submitted bids will be treated as earnest submissions, even those submitted well before the response deadline. Be certain that you intend to submit your proposal before you click the Submit button on the Review page.

Important

Please consider making local backup copies of all text you are entering into the form in case anything needs to be re-entered. If you encounter any technical problems, please contact the OGC.

B.3.1. High-Level Overview

Clicking on the “Propose” link will bring you to the Bid Submission Form.

To complete the form, new users should start by providing organizational information on the “Organizational Background” Page and click “Update” and “Continue”. Existing users should check and confirm the information on the “Organizational Background” Page is correct and click “Continue”.

This will navigate to an "Add Deliverable" page. The user should complete this form for each proposed deliverable.

Tip

For component implementations having multiple identical instances of the same deliverable, the bidder only needs to propose just one instance. For simplicity, each bidder should just submit against the lowest-numbered deliverable ID. OGC will assign a unique deliverable ID to each selected Participant later (during negotiations).

A “Review” link, located on the far right of the screen, navigates to a page summarizing all the deliverables the Bidder is proposing. This Review tab won’t appear until the user has actually submitted at least one deliverable under the Propose tab first.

Tip

Consider regularly creating backup copies of this Review page at various points during proposal creation.

Once the “Submit” button is clicked, the user will receive an immediate confirmation on the website that their proposal has been received. The system will also send an email to the Bidder and to OGC staff.

Tip

In general, up until the time that the user clicks this Submit button, the proposal may be edited as many times as the user wishes. However, this initial version of the form contains no "undo" capability, so please use caution in over-writing existing information.

Under the “Done Adding Deliverables” section at the bottom of this page, a user may attach an additional document with further information and explanations. This document is optional.

Important

No sensitive information (such as labor rates) should be included in the Attached Document.

If this attachment is provided, it is limited to one per proposal and must be less than 5Mb.

This document could conceivably contain any specialized information that wasn’t suitable for entry into a Proposed Contribution field under an individual deliverable. It should be noted, however, that this additional documentation will only be read on a best-effort basis. There is no guarantee it will be used during evaluation to make selection decisions; rather, it could optionally be examined if the evaluation team feels that it might help in understanding any specialized (and particularly promising) contributions.

B.3.2. Step-by-Step Instructions

The “Propose” link takes the user to the first page of the proposal entry form. This form contains fields to be completed once per proposal such as names and contact information.

It also contains an optional Organizational Background field where Bidders (particularly those with no experience participating in an OGC initiative) may provide a description of their organization. It also contains a click-through check box where each Bidder will be required (before entering any data for individual deliverables) to acknowledge its understanding and acceptance of the requirements described in this appendix.

Clicking the Update and Continue button then navigates to the form for submitting deliverable by deliverable bids. On this page, existing deliverable bids can be modified or deleted by clicking the appropriate icon next to the deliverable name. Any attempt to delete a proposed deliverable will require scrolling down to click a Confirm Deletion button.

To add a new deliverable, the user would scroll down to the Add Deliverable section and click the Deliverable drop-down list to select the particular item.

The user would then enter the required information for each of the following fields (for this deliverable only). Required fields are indicated by an asterisk: * Estimated Projected Labor Hours* for this deliverable, * Funding Request*: total U.S. dollar cost-share amount being requested for this deliverable (to cover burdened labor only), * Estimated In-kind Labor Hours* to be contributed for this deliverable, and * Estimated In-Kind Contribution: total U.S. dollar estimate of the in-kind amount to be contributed for this deliverable (including all cost categories).

Tip

There’s no separate text box to enter a global in-kind contribution. Instead, please provide an approximate estimate on a per-deliverable basis.

Cost-sharing funds may only be used for the purpose of offsetting burdened labor costs of development, engineering, documentation, and demonstration related to the Participant’s assigned deliverables. By contrast, the costs used to formulate the Bidder’s in-kind contribution may be much broader, including supporting labor, travel, software licenses, data, IT infrastructure, and so on.

Theoretically there is no limit on the size of the Proposed Contribution for each deliverable (beyond the raw capacity of the underlying hardware and software). But bidders are encouraged to incorporate content by making reference or linking to external materials where possible (rather than inline copying and pasting). There is also a textbox on a separate page of the submission form for inclusion of Organizational Background information, so there is no need to repeat this information for each deliverable.

Important
  • A breakdown (by cost category) of the "In Kind Contribution" may be included in the Proposed Contribution text box for each deliverable.

  • However, please note that the content of this text box will be accessible to all Stakeholders and should contain no confidential information such as labor rates.

  • Similarly, no sensitive information should be included in the Attached Document of Explanation.

The “Proposed Contribution (Please include any proposed datasets)” field can be used to provide a succinct description of what the Bidder intends to deliver for this work item to meet the requirements expressed in the Technical Architecture. This could potentially include a brief elaboration on how the proposed deliverable will contribute to advancing the OGC standards baseline, or how implementations enabled by the specification embodied in this deliverable could add specific value to end-user experiences.

A Bidder proposing to deliver a Service Component Implementation can also use this field to identify what suitable datasets would be contributed (or what data should be acquired from another identified source) to support the proposed service.

Tip
  • In general, please try to limit the length of each Proposed Contribution to about one text page per deliverable.

  • Note that images cannot be pasted into the field Proposed Contribution textbox. Bidders should instead provide a link to a publicly available image.

A single bid may propose deliverables arising from any number of threads or tasks. To ensure that the full set of sponsored deliverables are made, OGC might negotiate with individual Bidders to drop and/or add selected deliverables from their proposals.

B.3.3. Tips for New Bidders

Bidders who are new to OGC initiatives are encouraged to review the following tips:

  • In general, the term "activity" is used as a verb describing work to be performed in an initiative, and the term "deliverable" is used as a noun describing artifacts to be developed and delivered for inspection and use.

  • The roles generally played in any OGC COSI Program initiative are defined in the OGC COSI Program Policies and Procedures, from which the following definitions are derived and extended:

    • Sponsors are OGC member organizations that contribute financial resources to steer Initiative requirements toward rapid development and delivery of proven candidate specifications to the OGC Standards Program. These requirements take the form of the deliverables described herein. Sponsors' representatives help serve as "customers" during Initiative execution, helping ensure that requirements are being addressed and broader OGC interests are being served.

    • Bidders are organizations who submit proposals in response to this CFP. A Bidder selected to participate will become a Participant through the execution of a Participation Agreement contract with OGC. Most Bidders are expected to propose a combination of cost-sharing request and in-kind contribution (though solely in-kind contributions are also welcomed).

    • Participants are selected OGC member organizations that generate empirical information through the definition of interfaces, implementation of prototype components, and documentation of all related findings and recommendations in Engineering Reports, Change Requests and other artifacts. They might be receiving cost-share funding, but they can also make purely in-kind contributions. Participants assign business and technical representatives to represent their interests throughout Initiative execution.

    • Observers are individuals from OGC member organizations that have agreed to OGC intellectual property requirements in exchange for the privilege to access Initiative communications and intermediate work products. They may contribute recommendations and comments, but the COSI Team has the authority to table any of these contributions if there’s a risk of interfering with any primary Initiative activities.

    • Supporters are OGC member organizations who make in-kind contributions aside from the technical deliverables. For example, a member could donate the use of their facility for the Kickoff event.

    • The COSI Team is the management team that will oversee and coordinate the Initiative. This team is comprised of OGC staff, representatives from member organizations, and OGC consultants. ** The COSI Team communicates with Participants and other stakeholders during Initiative execution, provides Initiative scope and schedule control, and assist stakeholders in understanding OGC policies and procedures.

    • The term Stakeholders is a generic label that encompasses all Initiative actors, including representatives of Sponsors, Participants, and Observers, as well as the COSI Team.

    • Suppliers are organizations (not necessarily OGC members) who have offered to supply specialized resources such as cloud credits. OGCs role is to assist in identifying an initial alignment of interests and performing introductions of potential consumers to these suppliers. Subsequent discussions would then take place directly between the parties.

  • Proposals from non-members or individual members will be considered provided that a completed application for organizational membership (or a letter of intent) is submitted prior to or with the proposal.

    • Non-members or individual members should make a note regarding their intent to join OGC on the Organizational Background page of the Bid Submission Form and include their actual Letter of Intent as part of an Attached Document of Explanation.

  • Any individual wishing to gain access to the Initiative’s intermediate work products in the restricted area of the Portal (or attend private working meetings / telecons) must be a member approved user of the OGC Portal system.

  • Individuals from any OGC member organization that does not become an initiative Sponsor or Participant may still (as a benefit of membership) observe activities by registering as an Observer. Prior initiative participation is not a direct bid evaluation criterion. However, prior participation could accelerate and deepen a Bidder’s understanding of the information presented in the CFP.

  • All else being equal, preference will be given to proposals that include a larger proportion of in-kind contribution. All else being equal, preference will be given to proposed components that are certified OGC compliant.

  • All else being equal, a proposal addressing all of a deliverable’s requirements will be favored over one addressing only a subset. Each Bidder is at liberty to control its own proposal, of course. But if it does choose to propose only a subset for any particular deliverable, it might help if the Bidder prominently and unambiguously states precisely what subset of the deliverable requirements are being proposed.

  • The Sponsor(s) will be given an opportunity to review selection results and offer advice, but ultimately the Participation Agreement (PA) contracts will be formed bilaterally between OGC and each Participant organization. No multilateral contracts will be formed. Beyond this, there are no restrictions regarding how a Participant chooses to accomplish its deliverable obligations so long as these obligations are met in a timely manner (whether a 3rd-party subcontractor provides assistance is up to the Participant).

  • In general, only one organization will be selected to receive cost-share funding per deliverable, and that organization will become the Assigned Participant upon which other Participants will rely for delivery. Optional in-kind contributions may be made provided that they don’t disrupt delivery of required, reliable contributions from the assigned Participants.

  • A Bidder may propose against one, several, or all deliverables. In past projects, more participants were assigned one deliverable, and fewer were assigned multiple deliverables.

  • In general, the Participant Agreements will not require delivery of any component source code to OGC.

    • What is delivered to OGC is the behavior of the component installed on the Participant’s machine, and the corresponding documentation of findings, recommendations, and technical artifacts contributed to the Engineering Report(s).

    • In some instances, a Sponsor might expressly require a component to be developed under open-source licensing, in which case the source code would become publicly accessible outside the Initiative as a by-product of implementation.

  • Results of other recent OGC initiatives can be found in the OGC Public Engineering Report Repository.

Appendix C: Abbreviations

The following table lists all abbreviations used in this CFP.

AI

Artifical Intelligence

API

Application Programming Interface

BIM

Building Information Modeling

CAD

Computer-Aided Design

CFP

Call for Participation

CityGML

City Geography Markup Language

COSI

Collaborative Solutions and Innovation Program

CR

Change Request

DER

Draft Engineering Report

DWG

Domain Working Group

ER

Engineering Report

FAIR

FAIR Findable Accessible Interoperable Reusable

GPKG

GeoPackage

INSPIRE

Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community

IoT

Internet of Things

IPCC

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

LH

Land and Housing Agency, referring to the Korea Land and Housing Agency

ML

Machine Learning

OGC

Open Geospatial Consortium

ORM

OGC Reference Model

OSPD

Open Science Persistent Demonstrator

OWS

OGC Web Services

PA

Participation Agreement

POC

Point of Contact

Q&A

Questions and Answers

Smart Camp

Referring to a UN Smart Camp, a community-centric approach to providing humanitarian assistance to displaced populations

SOW

Statement of Work

SWG

Standards Working Group

TBD

To Be Determined (at a later date)

TC

OGC Technical Committee

TEM

Technical Evaluation Meeting

TIE

Technology Integration / Technical Interoperability Experiment

UDTIP

Urban Digital Twin Interoperability Pilot

UN

United Nations

URL

Uniform Resource Locator

WFS

Web Feature Service

WPS

Web Processing Service

WG

Working Group (SWG or DWG)

Appendix D: Corrigenda & Clarifications

The following table identifies all corrections that have been applied to this CFP compared to the original release. Minor editorial changes (spelling, grammar, etc.) are not included.

Section Description

Deliverables Summary

Addition of TOs and Deliverables overview diagram.

The following table identifies all clarifications that have been provided in response to questions received from organizations interested in this CFP.

Question Clarification

Is an in-kind contribution required?

An in-kind contribution is strongly expected. Example in-kind contributions are access to internally held data or other computational resources, or a match on funded staff time committed to the project.

How do payment schedules work?

Payments to participants are made based on the successful completion of project milestones. The exact payment schedule is agreed as part of the contract negotiation and set out in the Statement of Work. Typical schedules have 2-3 payments made during the life of the Pilot Initiative.

Will the imagery for D101 be provided and, if it will be provided, will it already be labeled?

A sample of imagery can be provided, but it will not be pre-labeled. Labeling of camera image is a part of the D101 task. The objects to be labelled (number of categories and type) will be finalized in disussion with the UNGSC, who will represent the view of a potential user of this Geo-AI module. Potential objects include features related to road conditions. The images shall be encoded in conformance with the OGC GeoPose standard and the metadata of the training data should be prepared in conformance with the TrainDML AI standard.

Will particular types of IoT sensors be used for the D100 work item in the pilot?

As a starting point, data will be provided in the form of a traffic profile for each road segment of interest. This will include data on number of vehicles and road surface materials, e.g. asphalts, concrete, paves. Additional information such as 3D models, including wall surface materials, together with elevation data will be provided in CityGML by the Land and Housing Agency. From this traffic profile data, synthetic noise data may be generated. The synthetic data may be replaced eventually with real data from noise sensors, so the design should accommodate the characteristics of real IoT sensor data, but its collection is not planned within the scope of the Pilot Project.