# Presentation: 149097

## Framework for Risk Analysisin Multimedia EnvironmentalSystems - Version 2 (FRAMES-2)Overview

- FRAMES-2.0 Workshop
- U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Bethesda, Maryland
- November 15-16, 2007
- Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
- Richland, Washington

**Notes:**
I would like to help set a positive tone for this workshop.  This workshop is very important as it brings disparate groups together to coordinate development and assessment activities to solve complex environmental problems.

The focus is on communications to mutually benefit from each other’s development activities.   

We have invested significant resources in development of these systems.  Each system is valuable and meets a need of its developer.  There is no “best” system; there are many acceptable systems, and even the acceptable systems are rendered unacceptable if implemented improperly.

## Contributing Members

**Contributing Members**

## Conceptual Site Model

**Conceptual Site Model**

## Objective

-    Design a software system that allows for non-parochial communication between disparate models, databases, and frameworks.  Design a functionally easy system which can be modified and updated by “users.”
-    *Constraints:  Follow requirements outlined at the NRC-hosted 2000 workshop, documented in the *Proceedings of the Environmental Software Systems Compatibility and Linkage Workshop*http://www.ISCMEM.org

## Middleware

**Middleware**

**Notes:**
Model Type 2:  Link to slide on Plug and Play
FRAMES:  Link to slide on Communication
Entire Slide (final comments):  Link to Conceptual Site Model slides

## Slide 6

## Design Goals

- Design a software system that allows the non-parochial communication between disparate models, databases, and frameworks.
- Design a functionally easy system which can be modified and updated by “users.”
- Provide a platform that allows “objects” to **ACCESS** information generated/produced by other “objects”
- Keep it simple, not simplistic
- Make it understandable
- Standardize and develop consistent and repeatable protocols
**Reproducibility means Credibility**
- Visualize the problem -- PICTURES
- Visualize the results -- PICTURES
- Provide Sensitivity/Uncertainty Capabilities

## FRAMES-2 Communication

**Seamless and Transparent Communication Through ARAMS/FRAMES for Linking Disparate Objects**

- Model
- Output

**Model Output**

**Model Input**

- Database Data

- Database Data

- User-Specified
- Input

- FRAMES-2 infrastructure is interested in the I/O, not the Objects (e.g., models, DBs)

- User-Specified
- Input

**Model wrapping in FRAMES-2 requires adding ****dictionary**** and description files, and model switches **

**FRAMES-2 Communication**

## Example Dictionary

**Metadata Describing Concentration as a Function of Time and Location**

**Example Dictionary**

## Defining Connection Schemes

- Scheme #

- Connection Scheme

**1**

**Produce**
**DIC 1, 2, 6**

**2**

**3**

## Conceptual Site Model

**Conceptual Site Model**
**in the ****Simulation Editor**

## Applicable Models

- Non-applicable Models

## FRAMES-2 Editors(User-Friendly Wizards)

**System Information**
**DICtionary Editor** – Add/Edit DICtionaries
**(Units) Conversion Editor** – Add/Edit units and conversions
**Model Information**
**Module (DES) Editor** – Module info:  Icon type, Schemes, I/O DICs.
**Domain Editor** – Where the model fits in the system (e.g., Icon, Domain, Group, and Subgroup, but not Class).
**Work Space**
**Simulation Editor** – Conceptual Site Model (CSM) work space, containing the Drag & Drop functionality.

## Summary

- The strength of FRAMES lies with its peripherals:  wizards, editors, user-friendly interfaces, etc.
- The user supplies the components:  models, databases, spreadsheets, etc.
- QA/QC designed:  Reproducible at the touch of a “GO” button.