Abstract: This paper reviews the Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications that help achieve water-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Current applications of AI in the water sector include i) predictive maintenance of water infrastructure, ii) forecasting water demand and consumption, iii) monitoring water reservoirs and dams, iv) tracking water quality, and v) monitoring and predicting water-related disasters. These applications contribute to achieving water-related SDG targets, specifically 3, 6, 11, and 15. The literature review shows that: i) the rate of adoption of AI-based solutions in predictive maintenance of water infrastructure has accelerated, as AI becomes increasingly accessible, and data analytics and smart sensors become more efficient and affordable; ii) deep learning technology has enabled a new generation of water management systems, which can generate short-term (daily) and long-term (annual) forecasts. iii) as Asia and South America experience an increase in water reservoir and dam construction, AI-based techniques are being successfully implemented in reservoir development and operation; iv) water quality monitoring has been the most significantly impacted by AI relative to other applications, as AI is used to examine small samples and large water bodies, and for real time water quality monitoring; v) AI can be used to forecast water-related disasters with higher accuracy, frequency and lead time, allowing for focused management of post-disaster activity. The paper ends by highlighting the challenges of adopting AI to achieve water-related SDGs.
One of the highlights of the CoE’s work is determination of the student paper winner, this year given to Julia Suozzi of the University of Virginia for her paper, linked below:
Abstract. The purpose of this essay is to address the need for standards in modern communication, explain the challenges in creating these standards, and propose various solutions to these challenges. With the evolution of the Internet of Things (IoT), everyday objects have transformed into connected devices that are vulnerable to a host of attacks. In order to protect users, standards must be put into place. Although necessary, standards are extremely complex to develop due to their sociotechnical nature. Challenges in this process include market definition, determining what and when to standardize, organizational responsibility, and international competition. First, market definition must be considered due to the nature of standards compliance. Businesses comply with standards when there is a market associated with them and that market is well-defined. Since the IoT does not have such a monolithic market, how should standards be created? The next major challenge is knowing what to standardize and when it is appropriate to do so. This paper will explore approaches as described by members of the government, industry, and academia.
Responsibility is also a major challenge of standardizing the IoT. With so many organizations holding stake in the process, who is truly responsible for taking the lead? This question brings up issues of organizational politics, as each group has their own agenda and mechanism for reaching consensus. Lastly is a discussion of international competition. Many organizations involved in IoT standardization have international participation. Each of these nations has a fundamentally different view on issues such as “safety,” “privacy,” and “security,” making it difficult to reach global consensus. This issue is explored using the recent US-China trade war. In order to better understand these challenges and discuss potential discourse, a case study based on interviews with key IoT stakeholders is presented, focusing on the Internet Engineering Task Force, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology
One of the best ways to teach standards is to do standards. Standards Michigan now has a footprint in all fifty United States and, as the first mover and catalyst for user-interest standards advocacy by the education facilities industry (see ABOUT), we are happy to walk anyone through the regulatory landscape where the technical and business specifics of planning, designing, building, operating, maintaining and managing these “cities-within-cities” that we call the emergent #SmartCampus.
The deadline for the 2019 Student Paper Competition is April 30, 2019.
We welcome faculty, students and subject matter experts to our livecasts (11 AM Eastern time every day) to participate in “code-writing and vote getting” — i.e the essential substance of our approach to lowering the #TotalCostofOwnership of education in the United States and elsewhere. We do less standards administration and conformity and more “getting into the weeds” of leading practice discovery and promulgation. Getting into the weeds is the most effective way to understand and master the methods of becoming effective in standards advocacy; especially in the standards suites that are incorporated by reference into public safety and sustainability legislation.
“A View of Asheville, North Carolina” (1850) / Robert Duncanson
As we explain in our ABOUT, we are continuing the development of the cadre of “code writers and vote-getters” begun at the University of Michigan in 1993. We are now drilling down into state and local adaptations of nationally developed codes and standards that are incorporated by reference into public safety and sustainability legislation.
This post is a “test pancake” for generating discussion, and for developing a way forward for crafting state exceptions to nationally developed codes and standards. Every state will have to be managed according to its history, culture, governance regime, asset-base and network of expertise.
Standards Michigan will remain the “free” home site but state-specific sites such as Standards North Carolina will be accessible to user-interest code-writers and vote-getters. Please send [email protected] a request to join one of our mailing lists appropriate to your interest for #SmartCampus standards action in the State of North Carolina.
New update alert! The 2022 update to the Trademark Assignment Dataset is now available online. Find 1.29 million trademark assignments, involving 2.28 million unique trademark properties issued by the USPTO between March 1952 and January 2023: https://t.co/njrDAbSpwBpic.twitter.com/GkAXrHoQ9T
