View
27
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Incorporating Social Contribution Features in M-Urgency. Final Project Presentation CMSC 838C: Social Computing by Shivsubramani Krishnamoorthy. Dec 12 th ,2011. M-Urgency. Next-Gen Public Safety System Redefining how emergency calls are made to PSAP - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Incorporating Social Contribution Features in M-Urgency
Final Project PresentationCMSC 838C: Social Computing
byShivsubramani Krishnamoorthy
Dec 12th,2011
M-Urgency
• Next-Gen Public Safety System– Redefining how emergency calls are made to PSAP– Audio, Video, real time location and other contextual
information• E-911 call (Through SIP) + Video• Real time location – Google map• Personal information + special needs
• Three main components– Caller application– Dispatcher application– Responder application
M-Urgency
Flash Media Server
Flash Media Gateway
Audio/VideoLocation
Audio
Video
SIP Call(E-911)
Location
VideoLocation
Caller
Dispatcher
Responder
Technologies• Adobe Flash Media Server• Adobe Flash Media Gateway• Adobe Flex Framework• Android (>2.2) & iPhone
M-Urgency Server
Social Contribution
How can users in near vicinity of an incident help?
HELP!!!!!!!!!
Social Contribution
• Effective in situations:– Immediate assistance• Medical • Mugging/theft
– Multiple views• Fire• Accident• Traffic
Experimental Study - Initial
• Initial Level Study– How is the idea welcomed?– Informal interview/interaction to understand concerns
• People– 6 students
• 100% positive response.• No specific concerns
– 2 Dispatchers (UMPD)• Welcomed the idea• Bit hesitant in adopting new technologies
– UMPD IT personnel• Did not welcome the idea, though appreciated it.• Concerns regarding 911 standards• Security/privacy concerns
Experimental Study - Detailed
• Participants– UMPD set up a test group of 38
• UMPD employees and auxiliaries– Students and staff
• Design1. A provision to opt in • Option to opt in• Very short questionnaire• Though email.
2. Feedback logging system for every call• Questionnaire
Experimental Study - Results
• Opt-in provision– 26 responded• 79% - Always• 11% - Depends on situation• 7% - Would not risk• 1 person - other (disability)
– No specific concerns reported• 8 expressed slight concern about privacy• But were comfortable with dispatcher initiating the
process
Opt-in ProvisionDescription :
<………………………………..>
Opt in for social contribution: Yes/No
Willingness:AlwaysDepends on the situationOnly if desperate needWould not risk.Other – please specify.
Concerns:SecurityPrivacyBenefitsOthers – please specify
Experimental Study
• Participants requested to make at least one call per day (Mon – Thu)
• Dispatchers requested to attempt to find another user in vicinity– Simple questions/tasks• Weather/traffic/crowd etc.• Did you see something?• Requesting to meet other caller etc.
Caller’s LogInitiated a callOverall experience : Pos/Neu/NegAudio Quality:Video Quality:......…..….…...
Invited to the callSituation to accept the call: Good/Bad/NeutralBurden? Yes/No/NeutralSecurity/Privacy issues?
Dispatcher’s LogUsual QuestionsOverall experience : Pos/Neu/NegAudio Quality:Video Quality:......…..….
Invited Callers?Callers available in vicinity?Callers accepted call?Callers receptive to questions/tasks?Satisfying answer/tasks? Other issues/ incidents to report?
Experimental Study - Results
• 86 calls received– 16 with other callers in vicinity
• 12 answered, 4 ignored
• Dispatcher’s log– Callers receptive to questions/tasks – 100%– Satisfying response – 71%– Handling additional users became an overhead – 12%– Other issues (network/audio/video quality)– 26%– Grouping never performed
• Caller’s log– Two of them reported that they were busy when invited– Overall feedback positive– No specific negative feedback to highlight
• One special incident reported– Actual caller lost connection and second caller reached out.
M-Urgency
Recommended