New note

[18:44] few of those smaller artifacts that may be inserted. [18:49] That's primarily a big challenge that will happen with inclusion of AI, [18:55] unless and until it evolves as actually super intelligence. [18:59] There are issues that are going to be there. [19:02] I think it's a very complex topic.

[19:07] I agree with you when you say that perhaps you start to say that this contains artificial intelligence could be considered as a negative thing, not a positive thing.[19:20] Because at this point how you can trust this product has been checked and so on.[19:25] So honestly, I don't know if you want to do this now, perhaps. Let's see when we start to have the first cases.

[19:33] Let's try to understand a little bit. To add this field in the upload form, okay, we can do it. [19:40] And then I'm not sure then what is the consequence of that. [19:45] So we see that one of the products has been used, like using of artificial intelligence, then what? [19:53] Just for statistical purposes or what? [19:57] Just for us to understand how, you know, if the use of AI increases in our products, [20:04] just as a source of information for us to know, and then it could be more specified, [20:08] it might be like how, you know, in what level did they use AI? [20:12] Was it just to create, yeah. [20:14] Analysis, was it cross-checked by humans? [20:18] I can't introduce all the different levels of web scenarios [20:21] and then making transparent also on the website. [20:25] Say this web was produced with level 1 AI involvement or something [20:30] just to make transparent to the users. [20:32] Yeah, but they don't want to enter this nightmare access.

[21:02] and start capturing that. [21:04] I think we\'re correct to say that they can raise questions about the validity of the [21:10] products, but if it\'s being used and not identified, that will raise more questions about the [21:16] validity of our products than if we don\'t acknowledge its use at all. [21:20] And if people were to choose to not use the products, then we created using the [21:25] AI, that\'s their prerogative, but we need to be upfront transparent about where that\'s happening. [21:31] And that\'s not to diminish the technical challenges that may come with how we capture that information and measure where it\'s being used, but avoiding it because it\'s hard.

[21:02] and start capturing that. [21:04] I think we're correct to say that they can raise questions about the validity of the [21:10] products, but if it's being used and not identified, that will raise more questions about the [21:16] validity of our products than if we don't acknowledge its use at all. [21:20] And if people were to choose to not use the products, then we created using the

[21:49] or complicated [21:51] is it going to help us at all? [21:53] So I would encourage us [21:55] to think about how we do that [21:57] responsibly so that we [21:59] set back best practices [22:01] and standards. [22:04] I don't think [22:15] that's a short [22:16] encourage or discourage the barriers to use on your cell data because we are not always [22:27] and we're not ensure the quality or responsible for the VAPs created by EAS

[22:36] So in the sense we don't need to encourage the use of AI, so it's responsible for barriers. [22:48] But while adding some information, if the question of the BAP service plan,

[22:56] I said this is additional information to the users or viewers. [23:03] So I myself is welcome to have such an information. [23:09] So as I mentioned, I propose to

[23:18] continue to face this issue. [23:22] We will gain this discussion for coming to conference and [23:28] deeper discussion in China. [23:33] Is there a link? [23:36] Thank you. [23:38] Yeah, just one point to add, Mike just notified me also that since August of this year, there's also German regulation that requires people that like, you know, put products on the website to have certain transparency and labeling requirements for AI systems. [23:52] So it's not only something that we have to think about because of our users, but also, you know, I guess for ESA, I've got to. [23:59] have to also follow those regulation requirements from the EU. [24:03] So it's also something that will come to us no matter what we do. [24:07] So here I propose to move to the chat by UJSA, ESA, BAP, some other other chat.

[24:26] You have all seen these slides before, but they've been updated since the July ESB [24:40] since taking account of that use, so hopefully we reach an agreement on this in this session. [24:47] Just as a reminder, the conversation about whether facts made with non-chartered data should be on the child website.

[24:56] and how these should be handled. So the first question was about bats specifically on the website. So there are different types of bats, bats made by the VA, bats made by the permacus, bats made by other women bodies such as Central Asia and then bats made by the pernum-arpeed.

[25:18] products and PM. We've reached an agreement on which should be on the website. So I think all of the EF agreed that any VAPs that may be a chart of data should be on the website and those without shouldn't be apart from a few cases. So VAPs made by the Pernicus, use case three specifically, and VAPs made by Central Asia or other co-operating bodies.

[26:31] when there is no filter data. What are the reasons, it may be by CMS or by FDA, the value of it is, whoever may be, what are the reasons to accept apps by CMS without filter data? Any reason in the name? It's a good question. I don't know the reason specifically, but we knew someone has [26:52] have apps that are uploaded that just don't include chart data. [26:56] into the profession of whether we would like to publish those. [26:59] The next part is about whether these can be in course two. [27:03] So I think the ETS agreed that we can have BAPS uploaded into course two that are useful for the project manager and users within course two, but not necessarily on the website. [27:13] And I guess the final part of the conversation in our [27:17] what happens if for an activation the only vaccine available are made without charted data is quick views enough to be to have something so it's just so that yes to discuss essentially is the website just an example and an illustration of how the charter specifically the charted data is being used or are we wanting to host as

[27:17] what happens if for an activation the only vaccine available are made without charted data is quick views enough to be to have something so it's just so that yes to discuss essentially is the website just an example and an illustration of how the charter specifically the charted data is being used or are we wanting to host as

[27:40] all information related to a disaster on there. [27:44] So going back, I think we'd agree to that for the website, it should just be charter data, [27:51] but in Hotsuite we can have those apps that maybe will be accepted. [27:55] Let's say that anyway there are our value-anders and project managers that are working.

[28:02] on the disaster. So the fact that we have also additional data, this was always present in our system and even in the cost tools since the beginning, when we have the screen to upload a product, there is the option other data. [28:23] because the data were received not through those two, but perhaps from one of the data provided above the Charter, [28:31] but also will be external to that. Anyway, these are additional information. [28:35] Perhaps you can also make a one-order product with some external data and a Charter image, [28:40] so the point what you do is half and half. But according to me, in this case, they shall be published. [28:45] And anyway, these are all information that should go [28:48] to the end user. Obviously, these are information to the user. [28:54] So in COST-2 for sure we should have it. The question is when we want to publish or not. [29:02] But in this case also, let's think for a specific case on when we ask.

[29:09] Copernicus EMS to be our value-adver. In this case, Copernicus EMS is also requesting additional data. [29:18] That could be of the same satellites that we are using ourselves, so basically the same data providers, or should be also another provider that is not part of the as a Charter Vectoral constellation. [29:30] Why we should not show these problems anyway has been done in the frame of the Charter and the frame of the Charter activation. [29:38] The fact that the data source is not one of the satellites of the Charter Vectoral constellation according to this, should not be present.

[30:19] So, use the chart framework, but with the image from other sources. [30:24] So, they are displaying the results of the same place. [30:27] So, for the end user, it makes more sense to go to one place and have all the data there. [30:32] So, that's one case that I can think of being beneficial for having all VAPs produced during inside this framework of the call, [30:46] and the orific activation to be there. Of course, if it's not inside the activation, you will not do that just to [30:54] to have a better channel for the end user, but there are many cases that this is very useful. [30:59] Yeah, typically they would still be there, they can upload them to CUS2 and the end user would still get those. [31:05] It's purely about publication on the website. [31:08] So do we want to have the website having bags with completely unrelated charted data? Probably not.

[31:17] But if you're using the same framework and these are all being uploaded and posted to and available to end users, that is what we're saying is completely fine. [31:24] And also obviously any BAPs that are made part-on-part, like you say, have charter and non-charter data. [31:30] I don't see any issue of those being on the website. This is calling if there are BAPs that happen to have no charter data. [31:37] their correlation would be published but it would still be available to end users if you're going to see. [31:42] Just to make a cutting example, we had one activation of the Philippines that they only were the product that was done with the product not received through the Charter. [31:48] That was from one of the satellites of the Charter Oscillation that was coming from Black Sky. [31:59] So what do you do in this case? [32:00] So, the activation is the charter, it's done in the frame of the activation. [32:06] A satellite is part of the VITRA constellation of the charter, [32:10] but simply the data was not directly provided through the charter, [32:15] but was provided from FILSA. [32:18] What is the difference? [32:25] Here.

[32:26] Does the responsibility of the authenticity of such product lie with the VA? With the producer of the value of the product? Is the value of the responsibility of the contact of the value?

[32:50] In that case that and that value should measure clearly that the data received out of the chart [33:01] of it. [33:02] So, should mention the wrap up. [33:07] Why? [33:08] See, if some data, CARTO3 data you are getting too short. [33:14] That means you know that it is a CARTO3 data.

[33:16] I use some other data, text data and I will prepare a valid plan. [33:22] I will say that it is Cardinal 3. [33:23] It is not a single rule title. [33:26] But it is not Cardinal 3, I will say that Cardinal 3. [33:28] Then who will own it? [33:30] Who will take responsibility of the wrong communication? [33:34] It is any way the Baruwater.

[34:01] If it's external, then we know really quickly that it's external data. [34:05] And so for this case, it should be quite easy to just see, okay, if it's making a chance of data, we can publish it. [34:11] If not, we don't publish it on the website. [34:13] And this should be mentioned in the PM report or in the way what their questionnaire or questioner.

[34:42] According to me, I didn't find major problems to having this published[34:48] because it was done in the framework of the Charter.[34:51] The fact that the source was external to the Charter[34:54] should not prevent the FAT to publish something that was done under the umbrella of the Charter[35:00] with the Charter resources, let's say, in terms of human resources, not satellite resources.[35:06] During our easterly period I evaluated one PM report in that four value added products[35:14] out of four only one value added product was prepared from the charted data remaining read[35:20] from the external source of summary but he has not mentioned the source or anything but I could see that the data

[36:02] He disregards the data, but then he/she checks different resources and takes the data of the day after or as different observations without clouds. [36:16] What I mean is that these analyses can also be based on information derived.

[36:23] available in the charter but not using the data set directly. [36:30] So it's not a direct use of the data only, which I understand the point, [36:35] but it's also the type of information that you might have by looking at the data you already have. [36:42] It's obviously a grey area, but I think in the moment we have the possibility to publish it,

[36:49] We state that data are not directly from Charter, but it's a plus for the users, so why not? [36:57] That's bottom line, I believe. [36:59] But why publish it? [37:00] Because the user will still get access to it, it has been published. [37:04] So in that case, it can be uploaded to the food, the user can access it, but it doesn't need to be on the Charter website.

[37:14] because it isn't using the chartered data. [37:16] I guess the larger question is, what is the point of the child's website? [37:19] Is it that every single app should be there and available? [37:22] Or is it just an illustration, an example of the data that we've invited to the child and the product that we've made? [37:29] Because there is a difference there. [37:31] Because this is just about the website and not what's in cost to it.

[38:20] I would say Roberto not necessarily using the chart, if I understand why it could be made [38:30] to within the satin-Alessia for instance in the case of fixed. [38:35] It's a very difficult thing to arm it, but the manuals are not just only doing their work because the chart has activated. [38:43]

[38:46] So I'm not sure that we've got any way of telling whether a product not created a charter data, [38:54] it's just because the charter will activate. [38:56] Ms. Adele, for your argument, I think also there is no sense for us to publish 200 apps on one page of it.

[39:09] Just the best ones. [39:13] For instance, in case of Maypath, there were multiple value adders. [39:25] And now that a lot of the data is being made public,

[39:30] And there is a lot of know-how using geo intelligence. [39:35] You see such products coming in from various sources. [39:39] And many a time today are sending it to the VA's launchers. [39:43] So essentially I agree with the argument of Elizabeth and from English side as well that [39:52] we will be getting, there will be scenarios where a very disaster that becomes very popular among masses, we will be getting some thousands of sub-plans. [39:58] And at the end of the day, it will be a very balanced scenario wherein for one or two activations we will be getting say

1 BAM for it, maybe 0 and then there will be some where we became 200 or 300 BAMs. So it is better that we choose the best among the best rather than formulating it in all sorts of issues because there will be a lot of duplicacy also in terms of information and BAMs.

[40:35] that you get to see in such a minute. [40:37] Okay, so I think the [40:43] Weech BAP should be on the website [40:45] quantity-wise is probably a different discussion that we could have if required. [40:47] But in this case [40:49] would we like to change what's [40:51] being presented here? So are we [40:53] saying that any BAP [40:55] regardless of day-to-use could be on the website [40:57] or are we sticking with

[41:01] Perhaps maybe you have the data on the website, anything else, cost you only, with the exception of Perna's use case 4. [41:07] Any further comments? [41:17] And I think we gave my boundaries to the principal, as a principal, as the server's presentation

still we have some exceptional or maybe where case to consider further but so I propose to go ahead with this principle and if we have some exceptional or some

[42:10] Charter for SMDs, I request Webmaster to put a link to the Central Engine application page and vice versa. [42:24] So, a list for the Central Engine application is wonderful. Thank you so much.

[42:33] We'll update the VA procedure so we'll know this and we can send a summary job to the webmaster to do it first. [42:41] Thank you very much. [42:43] And the next topic under this genitalization is formalization of the V-type by itself.

[43:01] So this is going to be a short presentation to propose the formalization of the value of product types in the charter. [43:11] So I sent an email to PSA weeks ago with these product types, received a few comments, so I just wanted to discuss them today.

[45:01] So basically we have reference maps, delineation maps, damage maps, and evolution maps. [45:11] So I think these are pretty self-explanatory. [45:14] I think mostly everyone knows these. [45:17] I think they're pretty familiar. [45:19] And then there is also combinations of these. [45:25] For example, there can be a convolution map that is also a grading map. [45:28] So an evolution of the grading, for instance. [45:33] So these are the current product types, but we're also proposing an additional product type. [45:37] And this is what we're calling the intelligence report. [45:41] We can also call it something else if there are some suggestions. [45:43] But this is slightly similar to the products occasionally that the UN is providing, [45:50] where they have a multi-page dossier. [45:52] However, this is more of a... [45:53] in loop reports which is derived from the imagery rather than just simply a map, a standalone [46:01] map. [46:02] So the value of this product is in the interpretation of the different images and can be interpretation [46:08] of a series of images or a collection of different images around the area of interest. [46:14] So, you would like to add this project for a couple of different reasons. [46:25] [46:38] the raw imagery and then they commit to producing the chartered products. [46:42] So end users are only receiving the finished products, most of us know. [46:47] But we have had some requests and we have had some discussion with end users such as [46:54] civil protection agencies and military or technical governance, you can see this.

[49:49] required for them to be categorized as intelligence reports? [49:54] Could it be anything? [49:55] It just needs to include charter data, I guess? [49:59] Yeah, the idea is just that the value wire has analyzed a certain amount of the data [50:06] and that they have some analysis based on that.

Alternative names being considered: “Situational reporting” (as a possible alternative to “intelligence report”), “geo-intelligence”, and “security application”.

And they have indicated that they do have a certain level of expertise which allows them to analyze the data themselves. But they don't have a sort of GIS background in the sense of producing an actual mapping product. So we had this idea to recognize intelligence reports as a product type. And this would allow us to actually allow certain end users which have this specific technical capability to join the activation as a value adder, in which case they can access the raw data. So this would allow more access to the value or access to certain end users. Of course, if the end user does not, if they're not used to it, if they're not able to produce this product, then we still want to retain the fact that all the value matters must produce a product. So this is why we have this idea.

[49:49] required for them to be categorized as intelligence reports? [49:54] Could it be anything? [49:55] It just needs to include charter data, I guess? [49:59] Yeah, the idea is just that the value wire has analyzed a certain amount of the data [50:06] and that they have some analysis based on that.

Organizational idea: do you have any restriction there? The idea that most end users are not making maps, but some are making these types of reports, so that would allow them to be valid.

[43:22] We'll see if we can make motion to agree on this. [43:28] Can we see the next slide? [43:34] Yeah. [43:35] So currently when the VM is uploading or the VA is uploading a VAP, they have to select on cost 2 which type of that

[48:00] to recognize it in an initial project. [48:03] So as I mentioned, I made a draft of a new PM welcome document, and I circulated that to receive a few comments on this. [48:10] So thanks for the comments that you sent. [48:14] And the draft is currently on OneCloud, so we welcome any further comments. [48:21] There may be a few additional documentations that would need to be updated. [48:26] And we can also, for instance, include an example of some intelligence reports. [48:31] So I think now we would like to know if there's any objection to this, [48:36] and if anybody else has any additional comments. [48:39] Thanks. [48:41] Okay, thanks, Zegi. [48:43] and with all your presentation on the floor, maybe such a slum, sort of things.

Thanks, Zach, for the presentation and the reports.

[49:49] required for them to be categorized as intelligence reports? [49:54] Could it be anything? [49:55] It just needs to include charter data, I guess? [49:59] Yeah, the idea is just that the value wire has analyzed a certain amount of the data [50:06] and that they have some analysis based on that.

[50:47] So then we would have changed how we, because we hear the recommendations for the BAs, we give those VAP recommendations, what we expect for them to have, and then we need to be attentive. [50:54] Yeah, I think we can consider this sort of a separate category. [51:01] So if there's VAP like that, we're going to have a different category.

In the base app’s core, the groups responsible for app generation also apply to illustrations in the agents report. If a snap‑code uses a play‑at image or a tarsar image, it must include a scale and the chat‑on logo. These requirements apply to all illustrations derived from imagery in the report.

[51:32] Because I think you said that sometimes the end users have expertise but not necessarily [51:37] in GIS or producing webs. [51:39] So maybe it would be easier to not have those requirements and just say, you know, get quick [51:44] information and then they don't have to go into GIS and get all those elements into the [51:51] product. [51:52] Yes, but at the same time we want to avoid the quick and dirty

Organizational idea: do you have any restriction there? The idea that most end users are not making maps, but some are making these types of reports, so that would allow them to be valid.