Hey Bruce, Hah!
Unfortunately all you get is the short summary through the website which does make it scientifically hard to judge, however, then again this isn't science, it's a glorified popularity contest. I have a little bit more detailed abstract that I wrote up, pasted below (of course the part that they don't use to solicit votes): ---longer abstract The NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology contributes to many Big Data projects for Earth science such as the U.S. National Climate Assessment (NCA) and for astronomy such as next generation astronomical instruments like the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) that will generate unprecedented volumes of data (700TB/sec!). Through these projects, we are addressing four key challenges critical for the Hadoop community and broader open source Big Data community to consider: (1) unobtrusively integrating science algorithms into large scale processing systems; (2) selecting and deploying high powered data movement technologies for data staging and remote data acquisition; processing, and delivery to our customers and users; (3) better leveraging of cloud computing (storage and processing) technologies in NASA missions; and (4) technologies for automatically and rapidly extracting text and metadata from the file formats, by some estimates ranging from a few thousand to over fifty thousand in total. This talk will focus on those Big Data challenges, how NASA JPL is addressing them both technologically (Hadoop, OODT, Tika, Nutch, Solr) and from a community standpoint (Apache, interacting with open source, etc.). I¹ll also discuss the future of Big Data at JPL and NASA and how others can get Involved. ----- You can think of that as the longer version of what I submitted. *grin* Cheers, Chris On 3/19/13 7:20 PM, "Bruce Barkstrom" <[email protected]> wrote: >OK, so you've got a three-word summary of some >hyperbole with Dumbo, the Flying Elephant. >How are you going to deal with the real >scientific constraints on the physics of combining real >measurement technologies and "mashing stuff together"? > >You need to remember that imaging instruments integrate >radiances with spectral responses and Point Spread Function >weighted averages over the FOV of whatever the instrument >was looking at - and that's just the instantaneous (L1 measurement). >If you do orthorectification, you've got variations in the uncertainties >across the image where the parts of the image where you've >increased the resolving power (by putting interpolated points >closer together) and have also increased the noise from the >orthorectification process that acts as a noise multiplier. > >Next, you've got stuff like cloud identification (and rejection or >acceptance) - which depends on spectral response, solar illumination >(during the day) and temperature and cloud property stuff during >the night - and finally, you've got temporal interpolation (not just >creating an average through emission driven by solar illumination >during the day and IR cooling at night. Where (the hel)l is >the physics that deals with this stuff? If you do get some >statistical stuff, why should anyone believe it contributes to >our understanding of climate change? > >I won't vote, but you can think of this as my input to your >scientific conscience. > >Bruce B. > >On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) < >[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hey Guys, >> >> I proposed a talk for NASA and Big Data at the Hadoop Summit: >> >> >>http://hadoopsummit2013.uservoice.com/forums/196822-future-of-apache-hado >>op >> /suggestions/3733470-nasa-science-and-technology-for-big-data-junkies- >> >> >> If you still have votes, and would like to support my talk, I'd >>certainly >> appreciate it! >> >> Thank you for considering. >> >> Cheers, >> Chris Mattmann >> Vote Herder >> >>
default.xml
Description: default.xml
