Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Futuristic Smart Architecture for a Rapid Disaster Response

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Disaster Management: Enabling Resilience

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Social Networks ((LNSN))

Abstract

The ability to control and contain an unexpected disaster event such as a bushfire or flooding in real-time is fraught with logistic and planning challenges. Information is difficult to assimilate both from structured and unstructured data that may be collected in real-time. Unreliability of mostly unstructured data from social media and mobile devices, though extremely helpful, can make it difficult to deploy needed help/assistance in time. Ad hoc planning specifically targeted at saving lives may be severely hampered when part of the infrastructure is destroyed that is normally relied on for data collection. Also when part of the infrastructure is destroyed that normally is relied on for collecting structured data, the situation can even make it harder for ad hoc planning specifically targeted at saving lives first. In such situations, a combination of unstructured data that carries uncertainties and limited structured data from infrastructure that might still be working after/during a disaster event can be used to the best of advantages and still enhance the control process to better achieve desired outcomes: i.e. real-time event monitoring through real-time limited and high uncertainty data; filtering unstructured data through crowd sourcing, not only for reliability but sometimes for language translation as well; short-term predictions of anticipated changes from already existing interoperable simulation models, using the limited structured data from infrastructure that might be still standing following a disaster; and all this with the aim of appropriate, timely responses to saving lives in a rapidly evolving environment. A generic management framework designed to be used during a “phase transition” between pre- and post events, and characterised by the interoperability of distributed simulation models, and the collection and sharing of structured and unstructured data via cloud services and “connected devices”, is essential for the consistent provision of highly effective responses. We explore this framework from a science and innovations perspective, advocating “antifragility” for emergency response system designs. For antifragility systems, failures do not stand for a breakdown or malfunctioning of normal system functions, but rather represent the adaptations necessary to cope with the real world complexity through the management of “robustness trade-offs” as it occurs in dynamic and real-world contexts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Adams NM, Field M, Gelenbe E, Hand DJ, Jennings NR, Leslie DS, Nicholson D, Ramchurn SD, Roberts SJ, Rogers A (2008) The aladdin project: intelligent agents for disaster management. In: Proceedings of the EURON/IARP international workshop on robotics for risky interventions and surveillance of the environment, Benicassim, Spain

    Google Scholar 

  2. Alighieri D (1977) La divina commedia, Canto III, Inferno, 7–9, La Nuova, Italia

    Google Scholar 

  3. Anand K, Kühn R (2007) Phase transitions in operational risk. Phys Rev E 75(1):12p. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.75.016111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Ashish N, Hegde R, Huyck C, Kalashnikov DV, Mehrotra S, Smyth P, Venkatasubramanian N (2008) Awareness technologies for disaster response. In: Terrorism informatics: knowledge management and data mining for homeland security (Eds) Chen H, Reid E, Sinai J, Silke A, Ganor B, Springer, Berlin, pp 517–547

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bahora AS, Collins TC, Davis SC, Goknur SC, Kearns JC, Lieu TN, Nguyen TP, Zeng JS, Horowitz BM, Patek SD (2003) Integrated peer-to-peer applications for advanced emergency response systems, Part 1: Concept of operations. In: Proceedings of the systems and information engineering design symposium (Eds) Jones MH, Tawney BE, Preston White Jr K, pp 261–268

    Google Scholar 

  6. Balasubramanian V, Massaguer D, Mehrotra S, Venkatasubramanian V (2006) DrillSim: a simulation framework for emergency response drills, In: Proceedings of the international systems for crisis response and management

    Google Scholar 

  7. Basak S, Modanwal N, Mazumdar BD (2011) Multi-agent based disaster management system: a review. Int J Comput Sci Technol 2(2):343–348

    Google Scholar 

  8. Batty M (2012) Smart cities & big data: how we can make cities more resilient, CASA, UCL, 90 Tottenham Court Road, London WC1E 6BT

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bossomaier T, Barnett L, Harré M (2013) Information and phase transitions in socio-economic systems, Complex adaptive systems modeling 1:9. http://www.casmodeling.com/content/1/1/9

    Google Scholar 

  10. Buldyrev SV, Parshani R, Paul G, Stanley HE, Havlin S (2010) Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks. Nature 464:1025–1028

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Carlson JM, Doyle J (2002) Complexity and robustness. In: Proceedings for the national academy of science USA, 1(99): 2538–2545, www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.012582499

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cavalcante HLD de S, Oriá M, Sornette D, Ott ED, Gauthier J (2013) Predictability and suppression of extreme events in a chaotic system. Phys Rev Lett 111:198701

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chakraborty D, Saha S, Clement B (2006) Negotiating assignment of disaster monitoring tasks, In: Joint conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems, Agent Technology and Disaster Management Workshop, pp 10–17

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chiaet J (2013) Civilian drones to change how we respond to emergencies, http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2013/11/25/civilian–drones-to-change-how-we-respond-to-emergencies/

  15. Chikumbo O, Goodman E, Deb K (2014) The triple bottomline, hyper-radial-visualisation-based, ‘decision making by shopping’ for a land use management problem using evolutionary multi-objective optimisation. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal (accepted)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chikumbo O, Goodman E, Deb K (2012) Approximating a multi-dimensional Pareto front for a land use management problem: a modified MOEA with an epigenetic metaphor, IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC). doi:10.1109/CEC.2012.6256170, pp 1–9

  17. Chu L-H, Chen B-S (2008) Comparisons of robustness and sensitivity between cancer and normal cells by micoarray data, Cancer Informatics, 6:165–81

    Google Scholar 

  18. Citizenship News (2013) Samsung showcases first ever digital Village. http://www.samsung.com/za/news/localnews/2013/samsung-showcases-first-ever-digital-village

  19. Csete ME, Doyle JC (2002) Reverse engineering of biological complexity. Science 295:1664–1669

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Dai L, Vorselen D, Korolev KS, Gore J (2013) Generic indicators for loss of resilience before a tipping point leading to population collapse. Science 336:1175–1177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Dean J, Ghemawat S (2008) Mapreduce: simplified data processing on large clusters. Commun ACM 51(1):107–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Deb K, Sundar J, Udaya Bhaskara Rao N, Chaudhuri S (2006) Reference point based multi-objective optimization using evolutionary algorithms. Int J Comput Intell Res 2(3):273–286

    Google Scholar 

  23. Deb K, Thiele L, Laumanns M, Zitzler E (2002) Scalable multi-objective optimization test problems. In: Proceedings of the congress on evolutionary computation, pp 825–830

    Google Scholar 

  24. Demirbas M (2013) Antifragility from an engineering perspective, University at Buffalo. http://muratbuffalo.blogspot.co.nz/2013/06/antifragility-from-engineering.html

  25. Dorogovtsev SN, Goltsev AV, Mendes JFF (2008) Critical phenomena in complex networks. Rev Mod Phys 80:1275–1335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Freeman W (1992) Tutorial on neurobiology: from single neurons to brain chaos. Int J Bifurcat Chaos 2(3):451–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Goodman E, Deb K (2014) Personal communication. Center for the Study of Evolution, Michigan State University, Beacon

    Google Scholar 

  28. Google play (2014) Be-Bound: stay connected. https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.altheia.android.bebound&hl=en

  29. Green DG, Newth D, Kirley M (2000) Connectivity and catastrophe –towards a general theory of evolution. In: (Eds) Bedau M. et al Proceedings of artificial life VII

    Google Scholar 

  30. Gutterman S (2013) The rise of the internet of things. Environ Leader: Environ Energy Manage News, Jan 8

    Google Scholar 

  31. Han L, Potter S, Beckett G, Pringle G, Welch S, Koo S-H, Wickler G, Usmani A, Torero JL, Tate A (2010) FireGrid: an e-infrastructure for next-generation emergency response support. J Parallel Distributed Computing 70(2010):1128–1141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Harrison C (2013) Building a resilient planet, IBM Redbooks, Point-of-View Publication, IBM Academy of Technology, p 6

    Google Scholar 

  33. Hengherr S, Worland MR, Reuner A, Brummer F, Schill RO (2009) High-temperature tolerance in anhydrobiotic tardigrades is limited by glass transition. Physiol Biochem Zool 82:749–755

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Holling CS (2001) Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological and social systems. Ecosystems 4:390–405. doi:10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Irwin D, Shenoy P, Cecchet E, Zink M (2010) Resource management in data-intensive clouds: opportunities and challenges. In: Proceeding of the 17th IEEE workshop on local and metropolitan area networks

    Google Scholar 

  36. Jain S, McLean CR (2004) An architecture for integrated modeling and simulation of emergency response. In: Proceedings of the institute of industrial engineers annual conference, pp 1503–1508

    Google Scholar 

  37. Jain S, McLean CR (2003) An integrating framework for modeling and simulation of emergency response. In: Proceedings of the winter simulation conference, (Eds) Chick S, Snchez PJ, Ferrin D, Morrice DJ, New Orleans, Louisiana, pp 1068–1076

    Google Scholar 

  38. Johnston MD, Tran D, Arroyo B, Sorensen S,Tay P, Carruth B, Coffman A, Wallace M (2012) Automating Mid- and Long-Range Scheduling for NASA’s Deep Space Network, SpaceOps 2012, Stockholm, Sweden. http://hdl.handle.net/2014/42582

  39. Kavis M (2013) Antifragile systems: designing for agility vs stability, The virtualisation practice: virtualisation cloud computing news, resources, and analysis. http://www.virtualizationpractice.com/antifragile-systems-designing-for-agility-vs-stability-22536/

  40. King R (2013) Amazon’s big data service Kinesis now available, ZDNet. http://www.zdnet.com/amazons-big-data-service-kinesis-now-available-7000024430/

  41. Kitano H (2007a) Towards a theory of biological robustness. Mol Syst Biol 3:137

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kitano H (2007b) A robustness-based approach to system-oriented drug design. Nat Rev Drug Discovery 6(3):202–210

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kleiner A., Brenner M, Bräuer T, Dornhege C, Göbelbecker M, Luber M, Prediger J, Stückler J, Nebel B (2005) Successful Search and Rescue in Simulated Disaster Areas, RoboCup 2005, Osaka, Japan. pp 323-334

    Google Scholar 

  44. Levin K, Cashore B, Bernstein S, Auld G (2009) Playing it forward: path dependency, progressive incrementalism, and the “Super Wicked” problem of global climate change, Earth Environ Sci 6:doi:10.1088/1755-1307/6/0/502002

    Google Scholar 

  45. Living PlanIT SA (2011) Living PlanIT SA MS cloud center: fire demo only video. (Video can be obtained by request from www.living-planit.com)

  46. Lynch C (2009) Jim Gray’s fourth paradigm and the construction of the scientific record, In: the fourth paradigm: data-intensive scientific discovery (Eds) Hey T, Tansley S, Tolle K, Microsoft Research, pp 177–183

    Google Scholar 

  47. Marecki J, Schurr N, Tambe M (2005) Agent-based simulations for disaster rescue using the DEFACTO coordination system, Emergent information technologies and enabling policies for counter terrorism

    Google Scholar 

  48. Massaguer D, Balasubramanian V, Mehrotra S, Venkatasubramanian N (2006) Multi-agent simulation of disaster response, International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Hakodate, Hokkaido, Japan, pp 124–130

    Google Scholar 

  49. Motter AE (2013) How to control your dragons. Phys 6:120. doi: 10.1103/Physics.6.120

  50. Mushegian AR, Koonin EV (1996) A minimal gene set for cellular life derived by comparison of complete bacterial genomes. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 93(19):268–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Nack F (2009) An overview on wireless sensor networks, institute of computer science (ICS). Freie Universität, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  52. Nicholson D (2012) ORCHID: the science and application of human agent collectives, Open Informatics. http://slideslive.com/38889039/orchid-the-science-and-application-of-human-agent-collectives

  53. Norris F, Stevens S, Pfefferbaum B, Wyche K, Pfefferbaum R (2008) Community resilience as a metaphor, theory, set of capacities, and strategy for disaster readiness. Am J Community Psychol 41(1):127–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. OnScale Solutions (2014) Scalaris. http://www.onscale.de/scalarix.html

  55. Phan LTX, Zhang Z, Zheng Q, Loo BT, Lee I (2008) An empirical analysis of scheduling techniques for real-time cloud-based data processing. In: IEEE international conference on service-oriented computing and applications, pp 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  56. Radicchi F, Arenas A (2013) Abrupt transition in the structural formation of interconnected networks. Nat Phys 9:717–720

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Radicchi F (2013) Driving interconnected networks to supercriticality, arXiv: 1311.7031v2

    Google Scholar 

  58. Ramchurn SD, Rogers A, Macarthur K, Farinelli A, Vytelingum P, Vetsikas L, Jennings NR (2008) Agent-based coordination technologies in disaster management (demo paper). In: Proceedings of 7th conference on autonomous agents and multi-agent systems (Eds) Padgham, Parkes, Müller, Parsons. Estoril, Portugal, pp 1651–1652

    Google Scholar 

  59. Resilience engineering association (2014) http://www.resilience-engineering-association.org/

  60. Scheffer M, Carpenter SR (2003) Catastrophic regime shifts in ecosystems: linking theory to observation. Trends Ecol Evol 18(12):648–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Schulze H, Mochalski K (2009) Internet study 2008/2009, Leipzig. ipoque, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  62. Sohrabi K, Gao J, Ailawadhi V, Pottie GJ (1999) Protocols for self-organisastion of a wireless sensor network. In: 37th Allerton conference on communication, computing and control, p 24

    Google Scholar 

  63. Sornette D (2009) Dragon kings, black swans and the prediction of crises. J Terraspace Sci Eng 2(1):1–18

    Google Scholar 

  64. Taleb N (2012) Antifragile: things that gain from disorder. Random House, New York

    Google Scholar 

  65. UN-Habitat (2013) State of the world cities 2012/2013: prosperity of cities, Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, New York

    Google Scholar 

  66. United Nations (2008) Disaster preparedness for effective response: guidance and indicator package for implementing priority five of the hyogo framework 2005-2015. UN/ISDR, United Nations, Geneva

    Google Scholar 

  67. Van Roy P (2009) The Self-managing, ‘Unbreakable’ Internet?, ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 14 October 2009. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091006104053.htm

  68. Vassev E, Hinchey M (2011) Towards the formal language for knowledge representation in autonomic service-component ensembles, In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on data mining and intelligent information technology applications (ICMIA2011), AICIT, IEEE Xplore

    Google Scholar 

  69. Wagner A (2007) Robustness and evolvability in living systems. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  70. Williams P (2012) Smart thinking solutions, session: emergencies and security, Smart City Expo—World Congress, Barcelona, Spain. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_QWhqKv6pA#t=205

  71. Wirsing M, Hölzl M, Tribastone M, Zambonelli F (2013) ASCENS: engineering automatic service-component ensembles. Formal Meth Compon Objects, Lect Notes Comput Sci 7542:1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Zhou K, Dolye J (1997) Essentials of robust control. Prentice Hall, New Jersey

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The original ideas of this work were fleshed out under the FRENZ (Facilitating Research co-operation between Europe and NZ) Sandpit 2011, on “The Use of ICT Tools for Governance and Policy Modelling” dubbed RESPITE (RESilient, raPid response management and Instantaneous disasTEr communiqué systems) by, Hugh Canard (NZ), Tony Norris (NZ), Paul Chippendale (Italy), Julian Padget (UK), Naktarious Chrysoulakis (Greece), Dine Giuli (Italy), and Oliver Chikumbo (USA). Since then the RESPITE ideas have rapidly evolved with the inclusion of PlanIT OS-WISDOM developments and antifragility concepts for the IoT under BEACON, Center for Study of Evolution in Action (Michigan State University), and Living PlanIT SA. We are thankful for their feedback and final comments on this chapter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, BEACON Center, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA

    Oliver Chikumbo

  2. Living PlanIT SA, 21 Ruelle des Moulins, 1260, Nyon, Vaud, Switzerland

    Oliver Chikumbo & Steve Lewis

  3. Environmental Group, Groundwater Processes, Lincoln Agritech Ltd, Hamilton, New Zealand

    Hugh Canard

  4. School of Engineering and Advanced Technology, Massey University, 0745, Auckland, New Zealand

    Tony Norris

Authors
  1. Oliver Chikumbo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steve Lewis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hugh Canard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tony Norris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Oliver Chikumbo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Security Science, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

    Anthony Masys

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Chikumbo, O., Lewis, S., Canard, H., Norris, T. (2015). Futuristic Smart Architecture for a Rapid Disaster Response. In: Masys, A. (eds) Disaster Management: Enabling Resilience. Lecture Notes in Social Networks. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08819-8_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation