#### Teleconference 

March 26, 2008; 2:00 -- 4:00 pm ET\
Moderator: Elaine Freund

#### 

#### Executive Summary

#### Full Taverna demo for construction of workflows

#### Learned about VCDE in EY2 so ICR may consider touch points and collaborative efforts

#### 

#### Key Outcomes and Decisions

#### 

#### Action Items

+----------------+--------------------------------------+-------------+
| ##             | #### Description                     | ##          |
| ## Assigned To |                                      | ## Due Date |
+----------------+--------------------------------------+-------------+
| #### None      | ####                                 | ####        |
+----------------+--------------------------------------+-------------+

#### 

#### Next Steps

#### Define ICR WS structure and move forward on EY2 action items

#### 

#### 

#### Attendees

  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
  Juli Klemm                          NCI

  Baris Suzek                         Georgetown University

  Benjamin Powers                     IMS

  Li Kramer                           Booz Allen Hamilton

  Grace Stafford                      Jackson Laboratory

  Elaine Freund                       3^rd^ Millennium

  Mary McAdams                        

  Mervi Heiskanen                     NCI

  Mukesh Sharma                       Washington University School of
                                      Medicine

  Pankaj Agarwal                      Duke University

  Subha Madhavan                      NCI

  Sal Mungal                          University of Utah

  Ted Liefeld                         MIT

  Csilla Csank                        Millennium

  Ravi Madduri                        

  Bart Brown                          

  Brian Davis                         3rd Millennium, Inc.

  Charlie                             

  Jenny Kelley                        

  Patrick McConnell                   Duke University

  Rakesh Nagarajan                    Washington University School of
                                      Medicine
  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------

#### 

#### 

#### Announcements

-   Save the Dates: ICR F2F Sept 22-24

-   caBIG Annual Meeting June 23-25, 2008

-   2008 caBIG™ Annual Meeting Awards Program Call for Nominations due
    April 14. Categories: achievement, innovation, delivering results,
    collaboration, community contribution, deployment, mentoring,
    patient advocate.

-   Production Release Announcement: 3.2.1.3 caDSR Semantic Integration
    Tools:  the Semantic Integration Workbench (SIW) and the UML Loader.
    Features: enhanced Value Domain processing and UML Loader now
    generates a separate error log to facilitate problem analysis and
    correction.

#### Meeting Notes

[caGrid Workflow Technology - Ravi Madduri]{.underline}

<https://gforge.nci.nih.gov/frs/download.php/3827/20080326ICRWGWorkflow.ppt>

-   Defined a Grid as distributed, shared, secure computing resource.

-   caGrid is developed from ARCH and has no implementation technology
    requirements, but does have specifications for interoperability.

-   Nice visual presented showing how caGrid fits into caBIG and allows
    for orchestration of services in a meaningful way.

-   Workflow in context of caGrid is a connection of services where each
    individual service could not solve a problem (similar to but
    somewhat more complex than a pipeline).

-   A service workflow automates a sequence and allows for parallelism
    and persistence. Want to be able to flexibly access distributed
    services.

-   BPEL was used to describe workflows in caGrid but is not easy to
    use.

-   Taverna was selected as a workflow authoring tool and allows nonIT
    users access to workflow construction (replaces BPEL).

-   Issues and potential solutions with Taverna listed including
    stability of services, service specification, CDEs not guaranteeing
    interoperability, and reuse of workflows.

-   Next steps are to get more use cases, work with mentors and caGrid
    teams.

[Q&A]{.underline}

Q on intermediate coding that appears to be needed within Taverna.
Compare time with this and BPEL.

> There is definitely an issue around the services needing to have data
> types that are compatible (not fully compatible as of now).

Q If the first step is CQL -- a researcher is not going to sit down and
write code. There is a need for a portal query builder and workflow
infrastructure.

> Possibilities are for:

-   admins to write and make scripts available

-   a scientist to present types of services and retrieve a list of
    available services they may want to use

-   post taverna workflows

> There is a wiki page on caGrid.org which gives instructions on how to
> create a workflow. There are queries to find services is integrated
> into Taverna, how to download Taverna and get plugins (download plugin
> manager).
>
> <http://www.cagrid.org/mwiki/index.php?title=CaGrid:How-To:Create_CaGrid_Workflow_Using_Taverna#2_Getting_Started>

Discussion on issues of services stability and service specification.
Solutions discussed are publishing boundaries of inputs accepted. CDEs
don't guarantee interoperability (symantic and syntactic) for workflows
so reusing workflows will be useful. May want to create a repository of
workflows.

Q. on datatype matching and semantics

> Want to use logical relations

Q . Can you connect parts of workflows?

> Workflows are units with only one entry point per workflow so it is
> not possible to copy part of a workflow.

Q. for ICR WS -- Silver level reviews and CDE issues -- does it make
sense to work together before project is done via use cases and then can
test in Taverna before hand to be sure they work.

> General idea is good since it ties to specific use cases. You don't
> know until you are doing it what the issues are going to be.
> Discussion on articulation of priority use cases and test, and on
> getting more info on gold level compatibility before planning how to
> go forward.

[VCDE in EY2 -- Brian Davis]{.underline}

<https://gforge.nci.nih.gov/frs/download.php/3828/VCDEWS_EY2_20080326.ppt>

-   In EY2 VCDE will be focused on interoperability.

-   Projects:

    -   \~50 Mentoring already lined up

    -   \~15 Silver Level Compatibility Reviews

    -   4 CDE Standard Reviews

    -   2 Vocabulary Standard Reviews

    -   \>10 Ad Hoc Working Groups

-   Development Projects

    -   LexBIG

    -   Compatibility Review Software (CRS) System

-   Objectives:

    -   evaluating and integrating systems for vocabulary, CDEs and
        ontology content development and software for content delivery

    -   developing standards for the representation of ontologies and
        vocabularies and CDE and ontology content development

-   Presented maps of VCDE interactions in caBIG presented and of
    participants within VCDE and other domain WS.

-   External activities include interaction with Knowledge Centers,
    service providers, standards bodies

[Q&A]{.underline}

Q. How will CDE standards be developed?

> Work with WS. Look at associating CDEs with UML model snippets.
> Identification of high impact data standards can increase from the
> domain or be brought to the domain for review and approval. Either way
> it will be informed by the Domain Model or Backbone Model.
>
> ICR is the only WS to ever bring forward useful data standards.

Discussion on changes to Silver level check list and on Dynamic
extensions effect on compatibility reviews and tooling.

Q. How will ontologies be identified or the content develop in VCDE?

> Can be in VCDE or in domain workspace (owned within the WS and done in
> concert with VCDE).

Q. How will mentoring change:

> Focus now is on interoperability. Previously, mentored each tool in a
> vacuum, but now will be asking how is it going to work in a workflow.

Q. In looking at map, there are backbone modelers with line to ICR -- is
it inherently collaborative? Has VCDE looked to form joint WG for model
development? Will mentors look across domains? What is the mechanism for
harmonization?

> Context of Q was interoperability across domains. Would like the
> backbone model to be driven by the ICR point of view where applicable.
> One approach is for domain experts from ICR can present the component
> to the backbone model to extend or modify those concepts modeled
> within VCDE. Others are submitting use cases with compatibility
> reviews to test interoperability or to look at models and potential
> grid joins-- but approaches are a point for discussion.

#### 

#### Next Meeting

#### Wednesday April 23, 2008 

#### 2:00 -- 4:00 pm ET

Teleconference: 800-593-0616

Passcode: 2927756

Centra session: [http://ncicb.centra.com](http://ncicb.centra.com/)

Passcode: ICR_EY1

#### 

####