New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report (2010)

Chapter: APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS

Previous Chapter: APPENDIX D WORKSHOP AGENDA
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.

APPENDIX E–
RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS

NGA CORE AREAS

Photogrammetry

  • Go to 4-D space-time maps and ability to search and analyze for events and scenarios

  • Use multi-sensor (cameras, sound) and IMUs on people to do internal mapping of buildings in real time (fire fighters; soldiers)

  • Develop situationally aware tools: need to have products and analysis tools suited to the purpose

  • Analytic integration:

    • Using photogrammetry in the aid of social intelligence: (e.g., automated personal identification, crowd estimation, automatic generation of searchable maps)

    • Use of interactive systems, including gaming, needs to be leveraged by the geo-spatial science in a whole different level to support decision science

  • Need to move away from four traditional NGA core areas

  • Blending of computer sciences, statistics, electrical and computer engineering, geodesy, geography, bioinformatics

  • Integration of uncertainty and error into sensor models and analysis

    • Characterize multiple sources of uncertainty

    • Sensor errors

    • Confidence in data (subjective sources)

    • Models (empirical vs. physics based)

    • Utilize advanced statistical estimation, numerical methods, optimization

  • Adopt new strategies to address complex problems

    • Interdisciplinary

    • Multi-scale and multi-resolution data integration and analysis

    • More effective use of human in the loop

  • Leverage consumer photogrammetry and merge metric and non-metric technologies

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
  • Merge traditional and non-traditional sensing methodologies (kinematic, participatory networks, social media, surveillance networks)

Remote Sensing

  • Exploit hyperspectral imagery

    • Integrate with other data, GIS, etc.

    • Add time (as described in photogrammetry)

    • Exploit other information (culture, context, etc.)

  • Adaptive sensing (real-time) based on information value of sensor

  • Link the above with text information to aid classification and event and scenario recognition; link with visual analytics

  • Exploit atmospheric impacts as signals

  • Uses networks of “small satellites” to gain distributed data

  • Adapt products, tools to end user (first responder, soldier, analyst, etc.)

  • Emphasize multi-sensor fusion and information extraction

    • Decrease uncertainty

    • Exploit redundant capabilities

  • Greater utilization of state-of the art algorithms

    • Estimation theory – statistics and electrical engineering

    • Robust nonlinear optimization – numerical analysis

    • Statistical sensor measurement models - nonlinear filtering

    • Advanced software – Object oriented C++

  • Coordination with other government agencies

    • DARPA, Air Force, Army, Navy

  • Exploitation of knowledge sources beyond image data mining; make relevant knowledge sources available; knowledge-based classification

  • Enhance change analysis – beyond the process of measurement and classification to dynamics, behavior, and prediction (issue of sensor control and tasking)

  • Need more than just the inanimate landscape, but also the dynamic, social environment (e.g., the flux of a living city) = GEOINT

  • Metadata and tagging – hey for fusion; relate to other non- GEOINT sources (semantic and tagging interoperability challenge)

  • Augmenting the image analyst –more tools, knowledge, visual analytics, automation, mining given a specific remote sensor

  • Infrastructure implications – data storage, distribution, and throughput to the analyst

    • Remote sensing: We have lots of data (increased availability of commercially collected data). Can we analyze this data?

    • Data collection agency, delivering tools for data analysis (multi-resolution, multi-sensor, multi-platform, multi-temporal, current and future sensor technologies – including new sensors that are not fully understood)

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.

Cross-Cutting Issues

  • Data: bring processing closer to the data acquisition system (selective provision of data)

  • How to incorporate third party data and information into NGA processes (reliability, metadata, etc.)

  • Need more comprehensive metadata

  • Processing to support near-real time processing of constant data streams from drones and UAVs

  • Need to blur processing distinctions between satellite, aerial, and terrestrial data acquisition systems

  • Quality of information

    • Reliability and integrity of automatically generated spatial information

    • Scalability

    • More comprehensive use of supporting information (e.g., environmental)

  • Quality assurance: system calibration, mission planning for different applications

  • Quality control: verifying the quality of the different products at different levels (sensors, data, information, and knowledge)

    • Develop test sets for different products

  • Blending of information:

    • Interface across different information types

    • Information fusion (integration of open source information – quality control of information – evaluating the reliability of this information)

  • Information and data presentation

    • How to compress petabytes of data to kilobytes of information for presentation to the end-user

    • Supporting information needs to be more fully utilized

  • Automation:

    • Is full automation possible and do we need full automation? (reliability issue)

    • Provide increased human support to carry specific tasks

    • For example: Tuning the learning models (more of an art that relies on the expertise of the operator ◊ reducing the level of expertise required

  • Modeling and data processing:

    • Modeling of non-traditional and emerging sensors (e.g., DSLR, flash LiDAR, range cameras, etc.)

    • Data, information, to knowledge transformation

    • High resolution versus low resolution – local versus global coverage – smart sampling of the landscape

    • Considering the time dimension in geo-spatial data analysis (e.g., pattern of life assessment)

  • Fusion

    • Models for determining the optimal sensors and data needed for deriving desired information (requires data repository that have been geometrically, radiometrically, stochastically checked or pre-processed)

    • Information fusion: facial reconstruction, CV

    • Evaluate the results (how it relates to the end goal), understanding the data

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.

Cartographic Science

  • Multi-scale to continuous scale maps

    • Beyond tile-based mapping, beyond Mercator projection

  • Improve speed of map presentation

    • Multiple scale levels, all scales

  • Interactive cartography driven by eye tracking, brain sensing, other body sensors

  • Beyond cartographic scale

    • Investigate semantic aspects of scale

    • Represent human activity at multiple temporal scales

  • Need timely access to GEOINT at differing scales based on differing user tasks

  • Incorporation of volunteered geographic information

  • Social “mapping” in space and time in addition to physical objects and terrain… research challenges? Social links and networks have geospatial characteristics, how to deal with them in a spatial sense? … have to interface with other types (agencies) of “INT”

  • Address challenge of how to visually present data and information quality, reliability, and confidence

  • Determine what information is needed by particular users and determine the appropriate evaluation methods

Geodesy

  • Integration of GPS in all aspects of geospatial technology

    • Applications still in infancy

  • Increase proficiency in use and interpretation of GPS positioning

    • Provide means of assurance that people using GPS for particular tasks know what they are doing

  • Ubiquitous GPS

    • Integration of multiple receivers; phone, navigation

  • Expansion of continuously operated reference system (ground based) – CORS

  • Geodesy does not deal with humans directly (classical defn.), but gives information that supports societal and scientific needs… but reference frame is “invisible”

  • Impressive progress in geodetic accuracy… but how to “operationalize” geodesy missions and services? What should NGA do? GPS/GNSS used in many positioning apps… could we cope without it? What about difficult environments where GNSS doesn’t work?

  • Establish a geodetic reference frame at sub-millimeter level; research needed at observational level; drives high performance computing research, etc.

  • Next generation of positioning instrumentation and inertial navigation systems stable to the centimeter level over time

  • Geophysics: collaborative research, could be informative to NGA (in terms of data)

  • Application oriented datum; provide transformation

  • Gravimetry: UAVs; time dependent gravity; GRACE mission

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.

GIS and Geospatial Analysis

  • Continue to pursue temporal dimension

  • True, comprehensive and complete space-time GIS and geospatial analysis does not exist

  • Expand the narrative

    • Geospatial discourse constrains possible tasks

    • Restricted GIS vocabulary to communicate tasks

    • Production of narrative products at multiple levels of explanation

  • Incorporation of volunteered geo-information

    • Rating system for accuracy

  • Need to understand how to work with the narrative framework

  • Need to achieve timely automated extraction; need OO software approach

  • Automated service and workflow discovery to enable automatic tool application

  • Conceptualize complex information into story line

  • Communication of geo-spatial issues

    • Static and dynamic communication of narratives

    • Visualization of narratives

Cross-Cutting Issues

  • Are the core NGA areas “stovepipes?” Are they the right ones?

  • How do people respond, perceive, and trust quality statements, especially for large amounts of data?

  • Need integration of geo information from unstructured sources (text), physical domain, social domain, and knowledge domain with GEOINT

  • Use game based analytics: explore data set in terms of games; analyze game strategy and pattern; use information for interview techniques

  • Cognitive effectiveness of geo-spatial technology

    • Brain scans, MRI, eye/scan patterns, etc.

    • logical

    • physical

  • Broader cross training of students in geo-spatial workforce … computer science, behavior, …

    • understanding … geophysics, geodesy, …

    • facilitating interdisciplinary training and research

CROSS-CUTTING THEMES

Forecasting

  • Challenges

    • Predicting human behavior - relating social factors to physical factors. Geospatial elements need to become part of social network theory

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
  • No grand unified social science theory. There are multiple theories from many different parts of the social sciences

  • Low-hanging fruit - gross human behavior may be predictable to some level

  • More study required on foundational framework of social science integration with geospatial data

  • Rare events - perhaps some focus on predicting the unpredictable

  • Spatial data analysis methods need to be incorporated to get better predictions that put in spatial relationships and meaning

  • Need to tie together of spatial data and temporal forecasting

  • What are the validation methods? Need to develop general validation approaches. Need sensitivity analysis

  • Should we distinguish between prediction and forecasting? Be sure that all aspects of these areas are being covered

  • The forefront of modeling. More complex models that are combinations of very different models for actionable results

  • Technosocial predictive analytics

    • Interesting interplay between social networks and physical infrastructure

    • Needs systematic work on defining priors

      • black swans are a challenge since not enough data on extreme events

    • Needs visual analytics as a visual tool to gain better insights

    • Links possible with geocollaboration

      • collaboration over time, space, expertise

    • Beginnings of applying computing to sociology and anthropology exciting!

  • Modeling of human behavior – more interactive and real-time forecasting tools where problem domain is constantly changing. Use of normality modeling and anomaly detection as alternative to deductive based forecasting

  • Computational modeling, prediction, and analysis are important research topics for the future

    • Potential to guide data collection and assimilation

Participatory Sensing

  • Uneven distribution of sensed data

  • Privacy issues

  • Crowd sourced data aggregation methods need to be developed

  • Understanding when crowd sourcing is useful

  • What about foreign countries or areas where you can’t apply your structure?

  • A very powerful way of collecting GIS data “unstructured collection.” Need on-the-fly planning

  • Use the GIS as a framework. May already have some 3D models, images, etc.

  • Building shared spatial knowledge bases with participatory input and sharing. Active knowledge bases

  • Directed planning; opportunistic planning. Situationally aware models. Need to get actionable results. Spatio-temporal models of social, political dynamics

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
  • Trust and confidence; how to account for biases and keep this information with collected data. How to do quality control in a messy data environment. This needs new ideas

  • Add reference data (reference models?) as points of validation with data of uncertain accuracy and provenance. This could be a general approach

  • Embed social networking in spatial-temporal. Insert the idea of locality and spatial structure in social network analyses

  • Quality control

    • Need methods to aggregate measures of quality

    • Timeliness is an important dimension

    • Measures of trust, reliability, provenance: don’t trust; verify

    • Spot-checking with high-quality, calibrated sensors to improve trust and quality

  • Judicious use and context of information collected

    • For example, owner-defined property lines and conditions valuable in non-legal contexts

  • Systematic approaches to integrate information from multiple sources:

    • Domain knowledge and expertise such as local context (cultural)

    • Participatory data analysis – Wikipedia over GIS

    • Counterpoint to the deep and intensive thinking of the analyst

  • How to engage all relevant sub-groups (age, gender, socio-economic) in participatory data collection?

  • Develop the wider model against which participatory data can be tested. Use of prior knowledge for improved registration and classification

  • Understanding of the quality compromises and strengths of having mixed use of authoritative and public participatory data – requires broader development of the models of use

  • Understanding the relationship of culture and social factors to policy and practice of collection and use of public participatory data. Research into security issues of participatory data

  • Participatory sensing: Integration is important!

    • How to influence social media to generate data that is needed

    • Research to calibrate and judge quality of sensor in participatory sensing to allow decision making

    • Data fusion from this data with serious geo information?

Visual Analytics

  • Specific interfaces for specific users? Emphasize the generalization. What are the underlying fundamentals?

  • How to get from visualization to underlying methods? Need to understand the domain areas. Can general principles be extracted?

  • Developing a repeatable body of knowledge within visual analytics; for example, generic rules applying to the interpretation of data. Develop evaluation criteria

  • Integrated tools. Integrated, iterative, interactive—this is the new thing that visual

  • Interactive part of visual analytics is a key aspect of its contribution here analytics can bring, even using existing analysis tools (no toolkits)

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
  • New ideas derived by looking at aggregates. Individual locations to aggregations that make sense for groups. Functional and meaningful scales and multi-resolution methods. Attach meaning to aggregations. Space and time aggregations

  • Visual is not the only sense as you only reach a small part of the population (19%)

  • Interactive analytics is may be the right term

  • Metaphors for interaction with models and animations need to be developed

  • Integrated spatial and temporal analytics

  • Understanding the use of animation

  • Modeling, simulation, and high performance computing

  • Proper depiction of data quality and error uncertainties

  • Games

  • Social interactivity

  • Importance of design and art as an additional skill to be embraced

  • Workflow

  • Domain-driven integration of information from multiple sources

    • Take advantage of human cognitive abilities

  • Need to address how techniques work across scales

    • Agent-based approaches, links, etc.

  • Need new advances in interaction for visual analytics

  • Further strengthen bridges between visual analytics and other areas

  • Visual narratives

    • Causality

  • Quality of the visualization

    • Develop techniques to measure quality of the presentations

    • Minimizing unintended artifacts, illusions, confounds, etc.

  • Visualizing and communicating uncertainty. Development of interactive visualization tools - dynamic feedback with analyst through eye-tracking and other sensors

  • Collaborative two-way participatory augmented reality

  • Achieving the correct balance between full automation and visual analytics assisted decision making – how to decide which to use in specific situations?

  • Computational modeling and/or visual analytics

    • How to enable human reasoning with large amounts of heterogeneous geospatial data?

    • Data fusion

    • Deal with users

  • Science of interaction: Need to develop adaptive visual analytical methods to support geospatial users

Beyond Fusion

  • Data fusion

    • Relate to geo-space:

      • represent spatial and non-spatial dimensions

      • incorporate spatial structure: spatial variation or spatial correlation

      • couple spatial and non-spatial algorithms

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
  • time dimension?

  • Vector space and graph space; opportunities to integrate or couple? Cross-correlate outcomes? How to represent and handle uncertainty?

  • Different forms of spatial data

    • High-resolution, attributes cross space

    • Location (point or area), boundary, space of different scales

    • Models

    • Best way to combine GIS data layers, coding, incorporating uncertainty

  • Non-spatial data fusion (as in Haesun Park’s talk): cognitive domain

    • Cognitive aspects of knowledge fusion

  • Fusion challenges

    • Scale

    • Semantic interoperability

    • Different resolutions

    • Fusion at different levels (data, information, and knowledge)

  • Heterogeneous data of different fields and kinds of knowledge, disparate terms and understanding

  • GPS positioning

    • Data on positioning and gravity are uncorrelated, nicely separated

    • 2-, 3-, 4-D geodesy, not much to gain from data fusion

    • Essentially, it’s about data understanding

  • Fusion has a lot to achieve, let alone beyond fusion

    • Is it the same as merging? Conflation is part of fusion

    • Need for clarification, vocabulary, a scientific language

  • Can disparate data, information, and knowledge be put together? Redcross, trusted feedback, outdated geospatial data together

    • Would techniques presented take care of these?

    • Overarching issue of uncertainty labeling for broad NGA data set needs to be addressed; what is uncertainty of high-dimensional data?

  • A set of techniques for understanding relations in high-dimensional data

    • See also manifolds, etc.

    • Applications to GI data not shown

    • Loss of visibility of space and time at “preferred” scales

  • Powerful, but evaluation methods need to be developed

  • Do not stand alone—insight needs to be developed alongside

    • Analyst interaction important

  • Also need methods to understand large disparate data bases

    • Interrelationships possibly not understood

  • Both broader understanding and uncertainty reduction will likely require complementary, non-GI data

  • Comparison of fusion algorithms from visual analytics with existing fusion algorithms

  • Early fusion, mid fusion, late fusion

  • Bayesian fusion algorithms

  • Hard-soft fusion using hard sensor data and text, human generated, web derived information

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
  • Compare and evaluate the accuracy and applicability of these two types of fusion algorithms

  • Need scalable algorithms to handle large volumes of data in real-time and interactive mode

  • Would approximate, but faster algorithms be desirable?

  • Need to develop systematic approaches to matching computationally driven interfaces to user work practice

  • Need to investigate existing standards such as the Predictive Model Markup Language (PMML) to use the same data for different classification algorithms.

  • How to retrieve geospatial documents and extract geospatial information from text is still a challenge

  • How to use existing geospatial ontologies to inform the information extraction process

  • How to enable human computer interaction when complex modeling is involved

  • Develop methodology to create heterogeneous benchmark data sets for research

  • Formulation of standards for methodology and data structures

Human Terrain

  • Human landscape is a better term – human condition, biophysical conditions

    • Economy, sociology, transportation, anthropological, ethnic, religious, cultural, historical

  • Geospatial, social, cultural data integration and analysis

    • More systematic approaches in collection, coding, displaying, understanding

    • Categorizing trivial and non-trivial data

    • Voluntary and non-voluntary contributors may not be aware of the consequence of making data available

  • Data uncertainty, quality, consistency, reliability, disparity, fuzzy

    • Tools to filter and clean up data

    • Identify what data is necessary for a given task

  • Collaborative tools for crowd-source data

    • Interactive tools

  • Proper analysts with specialized knowledge

    • Human intervention to double check the quality (human in the loop)

  • Human terrain

    • Relate analytical outcome based on the significance of consequences of prediction errors; should we weight the outcomes accordingly?

    • Assess possibility or level of confidence on data and analytical outcomes

    • Interoperability: customized system vs. open system; closed sourced black box? scalability? Need to consider modularized system and develop API to couple with other systems

    • Need a stronger geospatial component in social network analysis; dynamic relationships over space and time,

    • Social networks in virtual space vs. in physical world

  • Cross-cutting

    • Complexity of analysis: ability to interpret the results

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
  • Absolute single result vs. multiple possible outcomes; means to assess and communicate uncertainty in decision support

  • Develop an architecture for supervisory level model analysis that combines outcomes from multiple models to mediate meaningful and coherent advice

    • historical studies: run models against historical or past data

    • compare outcomes from multiple models

  • Differential uses of words or dialects in different places

    • how to understand how people use language in the context of place (place-dependent use of words or phrases)

    • identify clues used in a language, relate the outcome in an analytical manner back to the spatial context (to know where the communication took place)

  • Methods to enable analysis in native language

  • Human terrain-based dynamic network analysis seems to serve well as one basis for structuring a broad range of social phenomenology in space-time

    • Representation and visualization in GI space an issue

  • Quality assertion, quantification an issue

    • Highly disparate underlying data quality levels; need agreed ontology

    • NGA to develop technical and ethical best practices for collection?

    • Interplay between space-time accuracy and relational accuracies

    • Deception possible, not easy to detect

  • A form of “narrative?” Perhaps useful to assess commonalities, distinctions in these methods

  • A larger issue lurking here? Methodological synthesis to deal with the space-time dynamic

Cross-Cutting Issues

  • Computation (cloud computing, mobile computing, analytical servers)

  • Distribution of data and data storage

  • Customization of products—making dynamic products for end users to dissect, modify, traceability of evidence and logic (case files FBI or doctors)

  • Validation, data quality, spatial uncertainty

    • Populist information: privacy, uncertainty, NGA’s role? Use to validate directly gathered data

  • Multiple levels of uncertainty (data, model)

    • Move to knowledge, wisdom, insight

    • New paradigm of uncertainty (based on analytical needs at hand)

  • Advancement of sensors

    • Sensor calibration

    • Smart sensors, miniaturization, on-board computing

    • Infrared, radar (better sensors)

    • Don’t lose focus; don’t forget the sensors

    • Don’t forget the core areas

    • Scenario modeling to deploy appropriate sensor for task (weather, geography, etc.)

  • Temporal analytics

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
  • Partner with NSF and other government entities, and with other international science entities

How do Advances in the Cross-Cutting Themes Shape the 5 Core Areas?

  • Can’t lose track of the 5 core areas

    • Cross-cutting themes support the 5 core areas, but can’t ignore or replace them

    • Cross-cutting themes need to show value to the core areas, not a substitute

    • Mathematics, visual analytics can directly benefit NGA and its missions

  • Adding time to space

    • Rich extension

    • How to do this? Visual analytics, 4D GIS. Time is difficult to represent; temporal analytics?

  • No stove-piping in 5 core areas

    • Also applies to cross-cutting areas

    • These areas blend together (look for and/or promote innovation at the intersection of these areas)

  • Science development needs to be plugged into international science community

Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 49
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 50
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 51
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 52
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 53
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 54
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 55
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 56
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 57
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 58
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 59
Suggested Citation: "APPENDIX E RESEARCH TOPIC NOTES OF WORKING GROUPS." National Research Council. 2010. New Research Directions for the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency: Workshop Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12964.
Page 60
Subscribe to Email from the National Academies
Keep up with all of the activities, publications, and events by subscribing to free updates by email.