RE: Roving air quality monitor example data usage

Hi Rudi,

Thank you for the enlightening and entertaining example.
It clearly shows the importance of how the presentation is formulated.

BR
Ulf

Ulf Björkengren Ph. D.
Connectivity Strategist

M +4553562142
ulf.bjorkengren@volvocars.com<mailto:ulf.bjorkengren@volvocars.com>

VOLVO CAR CORPORATION
94014 Lund R&D Tech Center
Frederikskaj 10A
Copenhagen, Denmark
volvocars.com

From: Streif, Rudolf [mailto:rstreif@partner.jaguarlandrover.com]
Sent: den 1 december 2018 01:08
To: T Guild <ted@w3.org>
Cc: public-autowebplatform <public-autowebplatform@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Roving air quality monitor example data usage

Ted,

This is a great example albeit not so much for air quality data but for the complexity of policies.

Briefly addressing air quality data: I think that is better measured by putting the relevant sensor into the areas of interest (cities, parks, etc.) then using vehicles, as other environmental data has to be measured e.g. wind speed and direction. However, that data is typically not provided by a vehicle sensor (it's also not really feasible to measure unless the vehicle does not move). The set of data you are mentioning, only provides information on how much that particular vehicle contributes to air quality. To get a good air quality measurement one would need pretty much the data from all vehicles in that particular area for it to be somewhat reliable.

Looking at the policy: how would that be presented to an end-user? The example has 10 sensor data points.

Scenario 1: "Dear Driver, MIT's Environmental Institute would like to collect the following data form your vehicle to assess the air quality in Boston: rain intensity, air temperature, engine mass air flow, long term O2 trim 1, O2 Senors WR, O2 Sensor Alt, longitude, latitude, altitude. Do you agree to collecting that data? Yes/No"

Driver 1 to MIT: "I appreciate the detail but you lost me at 'engine mass air flow' but I do understand longitude, latitude and altitude and I am not sure if I want you to know where I am driving."
Driver 2 to MIT: "What the ..."
Driver 3 to MIT: "Of course, it must be for a good cause, I trust MIT and I always click on Yes anyway."


Scenario 2: "Dear Driver, MIT's Environmental Institute would like to collect data from your vehicle to assess the air quality in Boston. Do you agree to collecting that data? Yes/No"

Driver 1 to MIT: "I am environmentally conscious but could you please tell me what data you are collecting?"
Driver 2 to MIT: "Another one of these spy apps..."
Driver 3 to MIT: "Of course, it must be for a good cause, I trust MIT and I always click on Yes anyway."


Scenario 3: "Dear Driver, MIT's Environmental Institute would like to collect data from your vehicle to assess the air quality in Boston. The data includes how much your vehicle contributes to the pollution as well as the current position of your vehicle and environmental information such as current air temperature and if it is currently raining and how much. We do not collect any personally identifiable data such as what car you are driving, vehicle identification etc. All data is collected anonymously  Do you agree to collecting that data? Yes/No"

Driver 1 to MIT: "Good idea. Deal!"
Driver 2 to MIT: "How does Google define 'anonymous' again?"
Driver 3 to MIT: "Of course, it must be for a good cause, I trust MIT and I always click on Yes anyway."


For me the most important part of all policy systems is presentation to the user. For this example, the user does not have any direct negative experience when not allowing the collection of the data. However, there are applications that provide the user with a benefit but sometimes the benefit does not seem to be directly related to the data accessed. These examples are even more complicated, as now the user should also be given information on how declining the request would impact the benefits.

:rjs

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 1:11 PM Ted Guild <ted@w3.org<mailto:ted@w3.org>> wrote:
The scenario I had in mind stems from a hasty conclusion I drew when I
saw an early prototype of VISS done by NewSky and Baidu on city buses
in China. The data points on the active city maps was showing a small
number of data points including location and engine temperature. I
wondered if they were deducing air quality based on how rich or lean
the engine was running. They weren't, it was a random selection of data
points. We heard last week on the Working Group call however where one
of the many IoT uses of vehicles is as a roving air quality sensor with
the aid of aftermarket sensors likely measuring parts per million of
pollutant particles. There may be inferences that can be drawn in the
absence of such a specific sensor based on the signals information
available.

One of my children suffer from asthma and impacted by air quality so as
a parent, I would not only wish to learn overall air quality where I
live but pockets that might have worse quality to avoid. I would also
be willing to participate in the data collection provided the service
and researchers are not collecting any identifying information about
me.

For this exercise we will provide verbose policy example, who is giving
permission to collect which data to be shared with which parties for
what specific purposes. Later we can take our examples and work them
into an actual policy language format.

I would be willing to provide information on engine performance, O2
measurements, my location, rain, temperature, etc to designated
researcher who in turns makes the data available realtime for air
quality reports.

There may be additional data points that can help provide answers on
air quality that are not obvious to me. These seem plausible and
sufficient for this exercise. Falling rain cleans the air and is
certainly a factor as is humidity that can exacerbate.

>From VSS here are some potential data points that might contribute to
such a use case:

Signal.Body.Rainsensor

Signal.Body.Rainsensor.Intensity

Signal.Drivetrain.InternalCombustionEngine.AmbientAirTemperature

Signal.Drivetrain.InternalCombustionEngine.MAF (Grams of air drawn into
engine per second)

Signal.OBD.LongTermO2Trim1

Signal.OBD.O2SensorsWR

Signal.OBD.O2SensorsAlt

Longitude Latitude and Altitude.

--
Ted Guild <ted@w3.org<mailto:ted@w3.org>>
W3C Automotive Lead
http://www.w3.org<https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org&data=02%7C01%7Culf.bjorkengren%40volvocars.com%7C60239318164446b504a808d657213230%7C81fa766ea34948678bf4ab35e250a08f%7C0%7C0%7C636792197421852661&sdata=V5lPwb4H2vWpD%2BlBDMGo%2FnYnA5Z5y4NbYG4HgCI6GYs%3D&reserved=0>


--
Rudolf J Streif
System Architect
Oregon Software Technology Center

M: +1.619.631.5383
E:  rstreif@partner.jaguarlandrover.com<mailto:rstreif@partner.jaguarlandrover.com>

[Image removed by sender.]


[Image removed by sender.]
UK: G/26/2 G02 Building 523, Engineering Centre, Gaydon, Warwick, CV35 ORR
US: 1419 NW 14th Ave, Portland, OR 97209
jaguar.com<https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fjaguar.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Culf.bjorkengren%40volvocars.com%7C60239318164446b504a808d657213230%7C81fa766ea34948678bf4ab35e250a08f%7C0%7C0%7C636792197421862665&sdata=TuYoW%2B5LTEw3B7wom393F43H2yUV6cbIsIBZCpekKYc%3D&reserved=0> | landrover.com<https://emea01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flandrover.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Culf.bjorkengren%40volvocars.com%7C60239318164446b504a808d657213230%7C81fa766ea34948678bf4ab35e250a08f%7C0%7C0%7C636792197421862665&sdata=Wmdo8wrNtRxRR7mKlV0bvpO%2B4ROtPRJgDv9V4i2mIo0%3D&reserved=0>

Jaguar Land Rover Limited, Abbey Road, Whitley, Coventry CV3 4LF, UK
Registered in England No: 1672070

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message including
attachments, is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed &
may contain confidential information. Any unauthorised review; use,
disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies
of the original message.