2 Gauthier.ppt [modalità compatibilità] · – preserving access to services and software that...

EU f nded Resea ch onEU-funded Research on

Digital Preservationg&

ICT for access to l lcultural resources

Albert GauthierEuropean Commission, Information Society and Media

Unit "Cultural Heritage and Technology Enhanced Learning“Info day 12 March 2012, Roma

Structure of my presentation Structure of my presentation

Digital Preservation

ICT for access to cultural resources

How to fail ??????

I t t (STREP IP NOE CSA) Instrument (STREP-IP-NOE-CSA)

Digital Digital PreservationPreservation

Digital Preservation in theICT Programme

Objective

ti t h l l ti d i ti th d– creating technology solutions and innovative methods for keeping digital resources available and useable over timeuseable over time

NB: does not include preservation of analogue objects

EU Investment

– since 2006: 15 projects; € 86 mio EU-funding

FP6 projectsFP6 projects

CASPAR

DigitalPreservationEurope (DPE)DigitalPreservationEurope (DPE)

PLANETS

••• 5

First FP7 projectsFirst FP7 projects

KEEP

LiWA

PROTAGE

P t PRIMEPrestoPRIME

SHAMAN

••• 6

Research baseline:Where do we stand today?

Some results of EU-funded research so far– formal models to characterise digital objects– methods and tools to support preservation planning– advanced tools for web archivingg– emulators for obsolete media (early computer

games)– OAIS-based technology platform, tested on various

types of contentf k f d l– framework for digital preservation in memory institutions

••• 7

Projects launched in 2011(ICT Call 6)

Scalable solutions for digital preservation– creating automated quality-assured workflows

supporting organisation policy based preservation planning and watchp g


Intelligent digital curation and preservation systemssystems– leveraging the Wisdom of the Crowds (social Web) for

content appraisal, selection and preservationpp , p

– preserving access to services and software that support business processes

– commercially relevant data; issues specific to industry and services (IPR, privacy, legal compliance, use of existing IT tools and infrastructures)existing IT tools and infrastructures)


Preserving complex objects– weblogs - challenge: continuously evolvingg g y g

– scientific workflows - i.e. not only results but also discovery process

Projects launched in 2011j(ICT Call 6)

Network of ExcellenceAPARSEN lli h d fAPARSEN – Alliance Permanent Access to the Records of Science in Europe Network

strengthening and extending collaboration amongst– strengthening and extending collaboration amongst major European stakeholders in digital data and digital preservation (focus on science records)

– creating a virtual digital preservation research centre

General trendsGeneral trends

• Broadening of the digital preservation community

• Large range of use casesg g

• Increasing participation of industry players as solution providers or problem ownersp p

• Services for end-users

– Open Planets Foundation: provides practical solutions– Open Planets Foundation: provides practical solutions and expertise, building on R&D outputs of PLANETS

– competence centre for preservation of digital p p gaudiovisual material: PrestoCentre

••• 12

Prominent research issuesMETHODS & MODELS

INTEGRITY

SCALABILITY

TIMBUS

APARSEN

WF4EVER

INTEGRITY

SCAPE

SHAMAN

ENSURE

LiWABLOGFOREVER PrestoPRIME

AUTOMATION

ARCOMEMPrestoPRIME

KEEPLiWA

PROTAGE

COMPLEX OBJECTS

••• 13

CONTEXT

Digital Preservation in thegICT Work Programme 2011-2012

Target Outcomes

a) More reliable and secure preservationa) More reliable and secure preservation technologies and methods(funding scheme: STREP)

b) Technologies and systems for intelligent management of preservation (IP)g p ( )

c) Interdisciplinary research networks (NoE)

d) Promotion schemes for the uptake of digital preservation research outcomes; roadmaps (CSA)

Digital Preservation in thegICT Work Programme 2011-2012

Budget

IP/STREP : EUR 23 Million

With a minimum of 50% to IP and a minimum of 30% to strep.

NoE and CSA: EUR 7 Million

Target outcome a) STREPMore reliable and secure preservation

technologies and methods (1/3)

RationaleDependency on digital resources in all domains of society

– Valuable business and knowledge assetsg

– Legal compliance (accountabilty, transparency…)

increased risks of loss, more preservation needs increased risks of loss, more preservation needs

Problem: Lack of trust in digital records and processesProblem: Lack of trust in digital records and processes

Target outcome a) STREPg )More reliable and secure preservation


Outcome– Techniques and tools for recovering loss and for

repairing damaged digital objects

S l i i h l il bili f– Solutions guaranteeing the long term availability of newly created resourcesnon-exclusive examples: 3D objects and modelsj

– Research may go beyond digital objects and include the long term functionality of systems for creation, management and storage of digital resourcesmanagement and storage of digital resources

– Conceptual frameworks for quality assurance

Target outcome a) STREPMore reliable and secure preservation More reliable and secure preservation


Underpinning research issues– Which currently available or emerging methods and

technologies are most efficient? In which use contexts or for which kinds of resources?for which kinds of resources?

– How do loss and damage occur?

Which degree of integrity is required for keeping– Which degree of integrity is required for keeping resources usable?

Target outcome b) IPTechnologies and systems for intelligent Technologies and systems for intelligent

management of preservation (1/3)

RationaleProliferation of digital resources, in increasingly complexforms

– What should be preserved?

– How can we keep it usable, i.e. functional and i f l?meaningful?



Outcome– Support to long term usability of digital resources

(including high volume, heterogeneous, volatile content) through a life cycle approach to its preservationg y pp p

– Support to human appraisal and selection processes, embedding reasoning and intelligence in the content it lfitself

– Activities may cover solutions to identify and erase obsolete informationobsolete information



U d i i h i Underpinning research issues– Keeping resources usable, i.e. meaningful and

understandable requires conceptual understanding ofunderstandable, requires conceptual understanding of evolving semantics, use contexts, and interpretations

Target outcome c) NOE

Interdisciplinary research networks (1/2)

Rationale– The digital preservation challenge is a complex one,

with multiple dimensions

D l d d l f l IT l i d– Development and deployment of novel IT solutions need to be situated in the context of many other issues and questions – e.g. social, historical, legal...g g

Target outcome c) NoETarget outcome c) NoEInterdisciplinary research networks (2/2)

Outcome– Interdisciplinary research networks bridging technological

domains and scientific disciplines concerned with information and expertise in end user needsinformation, and expertise in end-user needs

I t t N t k f E llInstrument: Network of Excellence

Target outcome c) NoEg )Interdisciplinary research networks (3/3)

Possible scientific disciplines– Computer science

– Humanities (cultural, historic, social... dimensions of under-standing information over time; preservation strategies for collective, individual memory?)co ect e, d dua e o y )

– Cognitive science, memory research: What and how do we memorise and how do we retrieve it? Models for digital preservation?preservation?

– Economy (business models, cost & benefits analysis)

Expertise in legal and ethical issues (e g privacy) and DRM– Expertise in legal and ethical issues (e.g. privacy) and DRM

NB: This is a non-binding list of examplesg p

Target outcome d) CSAg )Promoting uptake of research results

& roadmapping (1/2)

Outcome Outcome– Promotion schemes for the uptake of digital

preservation research outcomes including outreachpreservation research outcomes including outreach to new stakeholders and road mapping activities

Instrument: Coordination Action / Support Action

Target outcome d) CSAg )Promoting uptake of research results

& roadmapping (2/2)

RationaleRes lts f om applied esea ch in digital p ese ation– Results from applied research in digital preservation

– Emerging market for digital preservation solutions and servicesservices

-----------------------------

Preparatory phase for new multiannual framework– Preparatory phase for new multiannual framework programme for research and innovation:Horizon 2020 (2014-2020)

Impacts expected from the Impacts expected from the project portfolio

• Reduced information loss through better recovery and repair techniques and through deeper understanding of the reasons and implications of digital decay and other forms ofreasons and implications of digital decay and other forms of data loss.

• Sustainable access to information: keeping resources notSustainable access to information: keeping resources not only available but also meaningful and usable.

• More efficient and effective selection of resources to be preserved and of appropriate preservation processes, methods and technologies.

Wid d ti f h lt b l i d t d• Wider adoption of research results by supply-industry and by end-users

ICT fo access to ICT for access to cultural resourcescultural resources

Baseline in FP6 & FP7Virtual heritageVirtual heritage

Digital cultural experiences

• Virtual heritage:– ICTs for capturing, rendering, modelling

and visualising cultural artefacts to support both study and creative use of these both study and creative use of these artefacts, and their aggregation into virtual collections.

• Digital cultural experiences:– leading edge technologies for applications – leading edge technologies for applications

that improve meaningful use of cultural resources and rich user experiences

Baseline in FP6 & FP7Virtual heritageVirtual heritage

Digital cultural experiences

–FP6 projects: CINeSPACE, EPOCH, ISAAC, iTACITUS, MOSAICA, P2P-FUSION, QVIZ, AGAMEMNON, VENUS

–FP7 projects: ARtSENSE, CHESS, FP7 projects: ARtSENSE, CHESS, CULTURA, DECIPHER, PATHS, 3D-COFORM, V-MusT.net, V-City

Baseline in FP6 & FP7Digital libraries

• Scalable and interoperable platformssupporting access to and retrieval of supporting access to and retrieval of heterogeneous content, in multimedia formats, from distributed collections and o ats, o d st buted co ect o s a dacross languages

• Research work is supported by Research work is supported by coordination actions aimed at outreach to the stakeholder cultural organisations.

– Projects: e.g. BRICKS, DELOS, DL.org, MINERVAplus, TEL-ME-MOR

Baseline in FP6 & FP7Information retrieval, use and re-use

– Methods and tools for (semi-) automatic indexing and annotation of non-textual indexing and annotation of non textual objects (music, speech, images)

– Enhanced information and knowledgeEnhanced information and knowledgeretrieval through efficient search engines able to deliver results from complex multimedia resources from distributed multimedia resources, from distributed collections and across languages.

• Projects: e g EASAIER IMAGINATION • Projects: e.g. EASAIER, IMAGINATION, MEMORIES, MultiMATCH, PAPYRUS, QVIZ, Treble-CLEF, AXES



Work programme 2007-2008ICT CALL 1&3 ICT CALL 1&3

Selected projects3D digitisation, visualisation and modelling of cultural objects and sites

3D COFORM (IP) l f 3D 3D i h 3D-COFORM (IP) – new tools for 3D-capture, 3D-processing, the semantics of shape, material properties, etc. for an affordable, practical and effective mechanism for long term 3D documentation

V-CITY (STREP) - innovative system for the rapid and cost-effective reconstruction, 3D visualisation and exploitation of complete, large-scale and interactive urban environments. complete, large scale and interactive urban environments.

Improving access to digital library services & content i l bl in a scalable manner

IMPACT (IP) – advanced state-of-the-art in OCR and language technologies for historical texts

Work programme 2009-2010p gICT CALL 6

• 4 research topics on digital preservation, digital libraries and

l l h icultural heritage• Budget € 69 mio• 15 projects selected:

– 8 projects for digital libraries p j gand cultural heritage

– 7 projects for digital p j gpreservation

• Projects started in Dec 2010 - April ojects sta ted ec 0 0 p2011

Work programme 2009-2010ICT CALL 6ICT CALL 6

Selected projects (IP)

Innovative solutions for assembling multimedia digital libraries:multimedia digital libraries:

AXES – develops tools providing new engaging ways p p g g g g yto interact with audiovisual libraries for various types of users:

• search-oriented schemesearch oriented scheme• suggestions for audiovisual content exploration via a

myriad of information trails crossing the archive


Selected projects (STREP)

Adaptive cultural experiences:

DECIPHER – new solutions to the whole range of narrative constructions knowledge visualisation and narrative constructions, knowledge visualisation and display problems

CULTURA – next generation of adaptive systems, new forms of multi-dimensional adaptivity, innovative adaptive services interactive user environmentadaptive services, interactive user environment


Selected projects (STREP)

CHESS – narrative-driven cultural ‘adventures’ adapting continuously to the visitors, extend over space p g y pand time

ARtSENSE new mobile museum guides; cutting edge ARtSENSE – new mobile museum guides; cutting-edge technology of low weight bidirectional see-through displays that enables overlaying reality with digital information transparently physical objects directly information transparently, physical objects directly respond to visitors

PATHS – users explore the complex information space presented by CH material, create, edit, annotate and share their paths through CH material


Selected projects (NoE, CSA)

Interdisciplinary research networks:

• V-MusT.net – advance state-of-the-art for virtual museums by bridging technological domains,archival,

i l d iti isocial and cognitive science

Uptake of research results:Uptake of research results:• DigiBIC – deployment of best practice, tools and

results from FP6 & FP7 research projects in cultural h d l l b d h dheritage, digital libraries and preservation to the wider creative industry sector, including SMEs

Obj 8.2 Access to cultural resourcesj- in a nutshell

Target outcomes:

a) Technologies for creating personalised and engaging digital a) Technologies for creating personalised and engaging digital cultural experiences (STREP/IP)

b) Open and extendable platforms for building services that support use of cultural resources for research and education pp(IP)

c) Improved and affordable technologies for digitisation of special forms of cultural resources, including tools for virtual reconstructions (STREP)reconstructions (STREP)

d) Awareness raising of research results (CSA)

Budget: 40 mio € (35 mio € STREP/IP, 5 mio € CSA)Instruments: All instruments except NoEs (2 funded in call 6)Open/close: 18 January - 17 April 2012 (call 9)p / y p ( )

Target outcome a)Target outcome a)

Technologies for creating personalised and engaging personalised and engaging digital cultural experiences

(STREP/IP)(STREP/IP)

Technologies for creating personalised and engaging digital cultural and engaging digital cultural

experiences:

Research should address:- adaptability of systems for personalised

interaction with users- investigate technologies that add value and

i t lt l di it l t f t d new meaning to cultural digital artefacts and improve user engagement with cultural resourcesresources

- for example through smart, context-aware artefacts and enhanced interfaces with the support of features like story-telling, gaming and learning.

Adaptability/personalised p y pinteraction

• Adaptivity and narratives already applied in the call 6

• How intelligent is your system?How intelligent is your system?– automatic / implicit adaptation to users according to

changing conditions– manual / explicit customisation of the system by the

users themselvesusers themselves

• How truly personal interaction do you offer?

f f l l h ( h l– Specific context of cultural heritage (physical site visit, virtual visit), innovative technologies to personalise interaction with cultural heritage collections

– Personalisation becoming the norm, not the exception, g , p ,not just mere profiling and recommendation systems but technologies that are state of the art in the long term

Improved user engagement Improved user engagement

« E.g through smart, context-aware artefacts and enhanced interfaces »

– Ambient intelligence: many networked devices are g yintegrated (embedded) into the environment, accessible through mobile and/or fixed devices (enhanced interfaces) C t t th d i i d – Context-aware: these devices can recognize you and your situational context (smart, context aware) and anticipate your needs and request and change in response to you (adaptive)

BUT: « for example » means not exclusively!– Also other technologies that add value and new meaning

possiblepossible« Personalised and engaging » are the key!

Target outcome b)Target outcome b)

Open and extendable platforms for building services that support use of cultural pp

resources for research and educationeducation

(IP)

Open and extendable platforms for building services that support use of cultural services that support use of cultural

resources for research and education

Research should explore:• seamless and universal but also • seamless and universal, but also

customisable access to digital cultural resources

id f t h i l f t• across a wide range of technical formats(sound, image, 3D, text), including cultural resources/objects with diverse characteristics( l l i l)(e.g. languages, temporal, spatial)

• usability should be demonstrated through large scale pilots and specific contextual use large scale pilots and specific contextual use cases (e.g. functionalities that support active research, creation of new knowledge, meaning extraction)meaning extraction).

Open extendable service pplatform

• Baseline in the digital libraries research, mature systems/components developed during baseline researchesea c

– How does your proposed system relate to SOTA -pros and cons?

– New or improved platform (but do not reinvent the New or improved platform (but do not reinvent the wheel)

• Innovative service layers to be built on top of the architecturesarchitectures

– Content to be used, restrictions to its use?– Why these services, for whom?

S ifi li i fi ld d i d ( ) • Specific application field: education and (or) research

– First time we define the application field!

Optimised for use and usabilityOptimised for use and usability

• Seamless and universal accessTechnical interoperability (wired wireless mobile – Technical interoperability (wired, wireless, mobile, fixed…)

– Wide and unobstructed access across potential user (l ti b t l kill d t )groups (location - but also skills and competence)

• Customisable:– easy tailoring to specific individual / group use– easy tailoring to specific individual / group use

• Cross formats and objects:– wide range of technical formats (sound, image, 3D, wide range of technical formats (sound, image, 3D,

text), cultural resources/objects with diverse characteristics (e.g. languages, temporal, spatial)

UsabilityUsability

Demonstrated through:L il• Large pilots– Large proportial to the intended use/type of

collection (but « large is large »)collection (but « large is large »)– System acceptance with real representative

sample of userssample of users• Specific contextual use cases

– Within education and (or) research!– Within education and (or) research!• Ease/intuitiveness of use

User behaviour studies encouraged– User behaviour studies encouraged

Target outcome c)Target outcome c)

Technologies for the gdigitisation of

specialised forms of specialised forms of cultural resources

(STREP)(STREP)

Improved technologies for p gspecialty digitisation

• Research to adress some very specific challenges in digitisation– Cf. call 1 where mass-digitisation of cultural

heritage was the target – this is the opposite• What can not yet be digitised?• What can not yet be digitised?

– Justify the need for the specific digitisation technology at European level

• No size or form restrictions• small objects or large reconstructions

“F ” t i i 3D d lli (i l • “Focus on” capture, imaging, 3D modelling (incl. movement), virtual reconstructions – not exclusively!

Affordable and enriched Affordable and enriched

• Cost-effective advanced technologiesS i li d ( b ti ) di iti ti i – Specialised (« boutique ») digitisation is very expensive

– Show the « business case »: How much cheaper?Show the business case : How much cheaper?

• Enriched virtual surrogates – “Convey and embed knowledge beyond the original Convey and embed knowledge beyond the original

object”• Show the “winning formula” of use of the virtual

object over the physical objects (eg can be object over the physical objects (eg can be manipulated, enriched with associated data, use, re-use …)

Target outcome d)Target outcome d)

Awareness raising of gresearch results

(CSA)(CSA)

Coordination or networking action (CA)(CA)

- General definition

Coordination of activities and networking between the beneficiariesnetworking between the beneficiaries

– the organisation of events - including conferences meetings workshops or conferences, meetings, workshops or seminars

– related studies, exchanges of personnel, g pexchange and dissemination of good practices, and, if necessary,the definition organisation and management – the definition, organisation and management of joint or common initiatives together with management of the action.g

Specific support action (SA)p pp ( )- Generic definition

Support the implementation of FP7 programme and the Commission

– Monitoring and assessment– Conferences, studies, expert groups,

scientific awards and competitionsscientific awards and competitions– Operational support and dissemination

activities– Support for transnational access to

research infrastructures or preparatory technical work (incl. feasibility studies) ( y )for new infrastructures

– Support for coordination with other European research schemesEuropean research schemes.

What are we after?Awareness raising of research results

R d i• Roadmapping– Roadmapping to support future R&I work in

relevant fields (e g joint roadmaps of relevant fields (e.g. joint roadmaps of heritage institutions, creative industry, technology providers, national/regional actors innovation support services )actors, innovation support services...)

• Validation and/or take-up– You want to validate your research results in You want to validate your research results in

real-life setting, take them out of the « labo »?You need support for take up of your – You need support for take-up of your innovative products or services coming from previous EC funded research?

Expected impactExpected impact

• Affordability, widespread availability of tools and services for releasing the economic gpotential of cultural heritage in digital form and for adding value to cultural content in educational, scientific and leisure contexteducat o a , sc e t c a d e su e co te t

• Wider range or users of cultural resources in diverse real and virtual contexts and

id bl lt d t i considerably altered ways to experience culture in a more personalised and adaptive interactive settings

How to fail … And how to improve How to fail … And how to improve your chances of success ?

"What not to do" – Why is this ymessage necessary?

Call 6 – some data on the results64% of submitted proposals failed the 64% of submitted proposals failed the

threshold52% on criterion one – scientific 52% on criterion one scientific

excellence relevant to the objectives39% on criterion three – impact as 39% on criterion three impact as

outlined in the work programme

Conclusion: most below threshold proposals had only marginal

l t th k relevance to the work programme

Lessons from Call 6Lessons from Call 6

• Total requested funding by all proposals submitted: € 490 mio; proposals submitted: € 490 mio; available budget € 69 mio

• 15 out of 49 proposals above threshold selected for funding -ghighly competitive processCandidates for funding had to • Candidates for funding had to score near maximum on all 3 criteria

If you want to fail, then…If you want to fail, then…

I h f h k • Ignore the text of the work programme• Ignore ongoing work (not only in EU g g g ( y

projects)• Window dress the partnership Window dress the partnership • Describe your solution and end product

in great detail but omit to state which in great detail – but omit to state which problem your project will address and where the research challenges areg

• Produce a proposal that tries to do everything and loses credibility Often everything and loses credibility. Often less is more.

Critical questions you should ask q yyourselves

• Looking at the portfolio of current projects (notably the EC-funded)( y )– How far is the problem you intend to

address being already tackled?I th l ff i diff t d – Is the proposal offering different and innovative insights into an existing problem or addressing a new problem?

– Which communities are likely to benefit from the project / how are they being brought into the discussion? brought into the discussion?

– What are the substantive benefits impact of the project?Wh t th t ti l i k d h – What are the potential risks and how are they tackled?

When preparing the proposal ...• Describe the specific state of the art with

referenced evidence as well as the technical

When preparing the proposal ...

referenced evidence, as well as the technical baseline, and expected advancementsagainst which progress can be measuredaga st c p og ess ca be easu ed

• Show you understand the state of the art –avoid meaningless inventoriesg

• Check the timelines and anticipated outputs of ongoing research in defining your starting g g g y gpoint and the advances you will make – don’t replicate existing work

• Adopt a scientifically sound approach to involving users in the research, including to the assessment and alidation necessa to the assessment and validation necessary to build the evidence of impact

When preparing the proposal • Do justice to the multi-disciplinary

When preparing the proposal ...

nature of the areas – ensure theexpertise and the roles arebalanced and appropriate

• Find the right partners – scientificg pexpertise, cultural institutions,content holders, IT providers, end, p ,users...

• Provide efficient management –Provide efficient managementauthority and competence to handleboth administrative andboth administrative andscientific/technical leadership

In conclusionIn conclusion

• Reduce the number of unsuccessful • Reduce the number of unsuccessful proposals

Don’t submit if your proposal does not fully – Don t submit if your proposal does not fully match the target outcomes

– Don’t replicate ongoing work– Don t replicate ongoing work– Don’t recycle

Multiple submissions: It is not the number – Multiple submissions: It is not the number that will make you successful – but the quality of the research and the partners quality of the research and the partners

– High quality relevant research proposals –indicate the strength and interest of the gresearch communities in this Objective

FP 7 Instruments

What is a STREP?What is a STREP?

• Targeting a well-defined specific research issue ("problem approach")

– by creating new knowledge through basic research on a focused topic

– by improving existing or developing new products, processes or services and/or products, processes or services and/or

– by proving the viability of new technologiestechnologies

What does a STREP do?What does a STREP do?

STREPs typically combine the following types of activities:

• targeted, well defined and precisely focused h d t h l i l d l tresearch and technological development

• demonstration component(s) as appropriatedemonstration component(s) as appropriate

• innovation related activities: IPR protection, dissemination, exploitation plan

What is an Integrating Project?What is an Integrating Project?

Targeting ambitious scientific and technological objectives of a European dimension ("programme approach"), by integrating

– the various types of activities needed to the various types of activities needed to achieve the project goals

the critical mass of resources needed – the critical mass of resources needed (expertise, staff, budget)

ll l f h d l h i– all elements of the development chain in order to attain high-impact goals

What does an IP do?What does an IP do?

Integrating Projects cover a broad range of activities – such as

• research and technology development activities

• (large scale) demonstration activities• (large scale) demonstration activities

• technology transfer or take-up activities

• training

dissemination• dissemination

• IPR management and exploitation

What is a Network of

N t k f E ll i t lid ti

Excellence?Networks of Excellence aim at consolidating or establishing European leadership at world level in their respective fields throughtheir respective fields, through

– Overcoming fragmentation of research and deficits regarding ‘critical mass’g g

– Restructuring and integrating the partners’ research capacities in a sustainable way

– Enabling interdisciplinary approaches through cooperation between specialists of various disciplinesdisciplines

– Involving stakeholders outside the research communityy

What is a Network of Excellence?

A Network of Excellence is the instrument of choice if:choice if:

– the research capacity is fragmented in the area consideredconsidered

– this fragmentation prevents Europe from being competitive at international level in that areacompetitive at international level in that area

– the proposed integration of research capacity will l d t hi h i tifi ll d lead to higher scientific excellence and more efficient use of resources

NoEs – ActivitiesNetworking and integration

• Coordinated programming of the partners’ activities• Joint management of the knowledge portfolio

J i tl t d h• Jointly executed research• Staff mobility and exchanges• Establishment of shared research equipment and • Establishment of shared research equipment and

infrastructures• Setting up of joint supervisory bodies

S di llSpreading excellence• Training of researchers and other key staff

Dissemination and communication activities• Dissemination and communication activities• Transfer of knowledge outside of the network• Promoting the exploitation of the results generated g p g

What is a Coordination Action?What is a Coordination Action?

Coordination Actions are designed to promote and support

– networking and co-ordination of research networking and co ordination of research and/or innovation activities

at national regional and European level– at national, regional and European level

What is a Support Action?What is a Support Action?

Support Actions are designed to

underpin the implementation of the – underpin the implementation of the programme

help in preparations for future EU – help in preparations for future EU research activities

Support Action proposals may be presented by a consortium or a single organisation

What do CSAs do?What do CSAs do?

Coordination and Support Actions may carry out the following types of activity:

• Development of research and innovation strategies• Development of research and innovation strategies• Information, communication, awareness rising• Exchange and dissemination of good practice• Setting up of common information systems• Organising conferences, seminars...

Setting up of working groups and expert groups• Setting up of working groups and expert groups• Studies, analysis• Fact findings and monitoring• Organising awards and competitions

CSAs do not conduct S&T researchCSAs do not conduct S&T research

• DigiCult web sitehttp://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/ict/telearn-digicult/digicult en.htmlg / g _

• Contact• [email protected]

••• 78

Date post:	20-Jul-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

2 Gauthier.ppt [modalità compatibilità] · – preserving access to services and software that...

Documents