The Experts below are selected from a list of 19041 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Ilias K. Savvas - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Supporting the Requirements Prioritization Process Using Social Network Analysis Techniques
2010 19th IEEE International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises, 2010Co-Authors: Panos Fitsilis, Vassilis Gerogiannis, Leonidas Anthopoulos, Ilias K. SavvasAbstract:Requirements management and Prioritization is a complex Process that should take into account requirements value for customers, cost of implementation, available resources, requirements interdependencies, system architecture and dependencies to the code base. In this paper we present how Social Network Analysis can be used in order to improve software requirements management and the Prioritization Process. The presented model is based on meta-networks where basic entities are combined for representing requirements priorities, interdependencies, required knowledge, etc.. The analysis of the model is illustrated with sample data and a number of examples.
-
WETICE - Supporting the Requirements Prioritization Process Using Social Network Analysis Techniques
2010 19th IEEE International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises, 2010Co-Authors: Panos Fitsilis, Vassilis Gerogiannis, Leonidas Anthopoulos, Ilias K. SavvasAbstract:Requirements management and Prioritization is a complex Process that should take into account requirements value for customers, cost of implementation, available resources, requirements interdependencies, system architecture and dependencies to the code base. In this paper we present how Social Network Analysis can be used in order to improve software requirements management and the Prioritization Process. The presented model is based on meta-networks where basic entities are combined for representing requirements priorities, interdependencies, required knowledge, etc.. The analysis of the model is illustrated with sample data and a number of examples.
David N. Durrheim - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
accelerating measles and rubella elimination through research and innovation findings from the measles rubella initiative research Prioritization Process 2016
Vaccine, 2019Co-Authors: Gavin B. Grant, Balcha Masresha, William J. Moss, Mick N. Mulders, Paul A. Rota, Saad B. Omer, Abigail Shefer, Jennifer L. Kriss, Matt Hanson, David N. DurrheimAbstract:Abstract The Measles & Rubella Initiative (M&RI) identified five key strategies to achieve measles and rubella elimination, including research and innovation to support cost-effective operations and improve vaccination and diagnostic tools. In 2016, the M&RI Research and Innovation Working Group (R&IWG) completed a research Prioritization Process to identify key research questions and update the global research agenda. The R&IWG reviewed meeting reports and strategic planning documents and solicited programmatic inputs from vaccination experts at the program operational level through a web survey, to identify previous research priorities and new research questions. The R&IWG then convened a meeting of experts to prioritize the identified research questions in four strategic areas: (1) epidemiology and economics, (2) surveillance and laboratory, (3) immunization strategies, and (4) demand creation and communications. The experts identified 19 priority research questions in the four strategic areas to address key areas of work necessary to further progress toward elimination. Future commitments from partners will be needed to develop a platform for improved coordination with adequate and predictable resources for research implementation and innovation to address these identified priorities.
-
Accelerating measles and rubella elimination through research and innovation - Findings from the Measles & Rubella Initiative research Prioritization Process, 2016.
Vaccine, 2019Co-Authors: Gavin B. Grant, Balcha Masresha, William J. Moss, Mick N. Mulders, Paul A. Rota, Saad B. Omer, Abigail Shefer, Jennifer L. Kriss, Matt Hanson, David N. DurrheimAbstract:Abstract The Measles & Rubella Initiative (M&RI) identified five key strategies to achieve measles and rubella elimination, including research and innovation to support cost-effective operations and improve vaccination and diagnostic tools. In 2016, the M&RI Research and Innovation Working Group (R&IWG) completed a research Prioritization Process to identify key research questions and update the global research agenda. The R&IWG reviewed meeting reports and strategic planning documents and solicited programmatic inputs from vaccination experts at the program operational level through a web survey, to identify previous research priorities and new research questions. The R&IWG then convened a meeting of experts to prioritize the identified research questions in four strategic areas: (1) epidemiology and economics, (2) surveillance and laboratory, (3) immunization strategies, and (4) demand creation and communications. The experts identified 19 priority research questions in the four strategic areas to address key areas of work necessary to further progress toward elimination. Future commitments from partners will be needed to develop a platform for improved coordination with adequate and predictable resources for research implementation and innovation to address these identified priorities.
J-p Siblet - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Spatial conservation Prioritization for mobile top predators in French waters: Comparing encounter rates and predicted densities as input
Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 2017Co-Authors: Juliette Delavenne, Fanny Lepareur, Isabelle Witté, Julien Touroult, C. Lambert, Emeline Pettex, Auriane Virgili, J-p SibletAbstract:International audienceEU member states have to develop their Natura 2000 networks in their national waters to fulfill their conservation obligations regarding species and habitats listed in the Birds and Habitats directives. In France, a coastal network of Natura 2000 areas exists since 2008 but it had to be completed in offshore waters for some marine megafauna species. The SAMM aerial surveys (Aerial Census of Marine Megafauna) which occurred in winter 2011 and summer 2011–2012 over a large area comprising the whole metropolitan French Economic Exclusive Zone produced sighting data for species listed in the Birds and Habitats directives. These data produced different types of species distribution data: encounter rates and predicted densities by kriging and habitat modelling. Using these species distribution data, the aim of the present study was to compare these different types of inputs in the same conservation Prioritization Process to complete the existing Natura 2000 network in French waters. We ran Prioritization analyses using the encounter rates only (scenario 1) then using the predicted densities provided by kriging and habitat modelling (scenario 2). We then compared the outputs of the two Prioritization Processes. The Prioritization outputs were different but not in contradiction, with similar areas appearing as important to reach the conservation targets. Habitat models were thought to provide better pictures of seasonal species distributions and informed scientists about the phenology and ecology of species. However, the use of encounter rates as input data for the Prioritization Process in the Natura 2000 program is acceptable provided that sufficient survey effort is available
-
Spatial conservation Prioritization for mobile top predators in French waters: comparing encounter rates and predicted densities as input
Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanography, 2017Co-Authors: Juliette Delavenne, Fanny Lepareur, Isabelle Witté, Julien Touroult, C. Lambert, Emeline Pettex, Auriane Virgili, J-p SibletAbstract:EU member states have to develop their Natura 2000 networks in their national waters to fulfill their conservation obligations regarding species and habitats listed in the Birds and Habitats directives. In France, a coastal network of Natura 2000 areas exists since 2008 but it had to be completed in offshore waters for some marine megafauna species. The SAMM aerial surveys (Aerial Census of Marine Megafauna) which occurred in winter 2011 and summer 2011–2012 over a large area comprising the whole metropolitan French Economic Exclusive Zone produced sighting data for species listed in the Birds and Habitats directives. These data produced different types of species distribution data: encounter rates and predicted densities by kriging and habitat modelling. Using these species distribution data, the aim of the present study was to compare these different types of inputs in the same conservation Prioritization Process to complete the existing Natura 2000 network in French waters. We ran Prioritization analyses using the encounter rates only (scenario 1) then using the predicted densities provided by kriging and habitat modelling (scenario 2). We then compared the outputs of the two Prioritization Processes. The Prioritization outputs were different but not in contradiction, with similar areas appearing as important to reach the conservation targets. Habitat models were thought to provide better pictures of seasonal species distributions and informed scientists about the phenology and ecology of species. However, the use of encounter rates as input data for the Prioritization Process in the Natura 2000 program is acceptable provided that sufficient survey effort is available.
Panos Fitsilis - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Supporting the Requirements Prioritization Process Using Social Network Analysis Techniques
2010 19th IEEE International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises, 2010Co-Authors: Panos Fitsilis, Vassilis Gerogiannis, Leonidas Anthopoulos, Ilias K. SavvasAbstract:Requirements management and Prioritization is a complex Process that should take into account requirements value for customers, cost of implementation, available resources, requirements interdependencies, system architecture and dependencies to the code base. In this paper we present how Social Network Analysis can be used in order to improve software requirements management and the Prioritization Process. The presented model is based on meta-networks where basic entities are combined for representing requirements priorities, interdependencies, required knowledge, etc.. The analysis of the model is illustrated with sample data and a number of examples.
-
WETICE - Supporting the Requirements Prioritization Process Using Social Network Analysis Techniques
2010 19th IEEE International Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructures for Collaborative Enterprises, 2010Co-Authors: Panos Fitsilis, Vassilis Gerogiannis, Leonidas Anthopoulos, Ilias K. SavvasAbstract:Requirements management and Prioritization is a complex Process that should take into account requirements value for customers, cost of implementation, available resources, requirements interdependencies, system architecture and dependencies to the code base. In this paper we present how Social Network Analysis can be used in order to improve software requirements management and the Prioritization Process. The presented model is based on meta-networks where basic entities are combined for representing requirements priorities, interdependencies, required knowledge, etc.. The analysis of the model is illustrated with sample data and a number of examples.
Lola Eileen Mason - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
VISUAL Prioritization Process
Transportation Research Record, 1995Co-Authors: Lola Eileen MasonAbstract:Incorporating aesthetics into corridor design in necessary, especially with the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA). The challenge is how to incorporate aesthetic quality and transportation safety within budget constraints. The Visual Prioritization Process (VPP) was created to meet this challenge. The VPP is based on the fact that visual quality does vary and that a blanket approach to mitigation is not the best design. By prioritizing the visual elements, all areas will receive the minimal amount of mitigation with increases in mitigation only where necessary. The landscape architect and civil engineer work closely to ensure that the concerns of each are met.