Library

HealthSuite Digital Platform

  • Jan van den Biesen profile
    Jan van den Biesen
    17 November 2016 - updated 4 years ago
  • 1 comment
    Total votes: 0
External link: 
http://www.usa.philips.com/healthcare/innovation/about-health-suite
Author(s): 
Jan van den Biesen
Year of publication: 
2016
Tags: 
DEIWG2health

Page 12 of the meeting report of DEI WG2 states “The vision is for holistic data platforms for future eHealth and care, focusing on interconnectivity and interoperability, cross-sectorial approaches, mobility, and standardization”. Nevertheless, the HealthSuite Digital Platform (HSDP) of Philips unfortunately does not feature at all in the meeting report of WG2 or its Annex, neither do the slides on HSDP that I showed in the Health and Care subgroup.  

With reference to this vision and in response to your questions to WG2 I will upload the following files in the library:

  1. A summary of HSDP as an open digital platform for a cloud-enabled connected health ecosystem of devices, apps and digital tools that work seamlessly together to enable personalized integrated health and continuous care;
  2. My presentation of October 21 on HSDP;
  3. A presentation on health made by a colleague of mine in a preparatory meeting for the  Commissioner’s Round Table on the electronics industry later this month in Rome.

One of your questions to WG2 is “How can PPPs contribute to building platforms?” Of course, some of the PPPs could in principle help us building an ecosystem for HSDP and enhancing its uptake, but unfortunately our two major proposals on HSDP (BigMedilytics for the Big Data PPP and DP4Health for ECSEL) did not make it through the selection.

Comments

Log in to post comments
Alejandro Cadenas's picture
Alejandro Cadenas,
18/11/2016 11:18

Do you consider the 6 topics the right ones? Is there any topic missing? If so, which one?

The proposed list of areas provides an excellent coverage of the main issues to be addressed. However we would like to kindly propose the following changes:

  • Connected Smart Factory. In our view, this scope leaves out aspects of the Industry that are related to critical activities of the factories, like logistics, metering, etc. A vertical industry that is leading the implementation of IoT and Digital technology is the Utilities sector. So we would propose a naming that extends the scope beyond the Factory plant itself. A proposal would be “Connected Smart Industry”

  • We would like to kindly propose a new topic called “IoT Analytics”. It could be considered that all the development of technology and procedures to extract intelligence from industrial data via analytical predictive models and pattern recognition are included in the “Industrial Data Platform” topic. However during the meeting in Brussels on October 21st it was understood that the focus of that topic is actually the data capture, storage and governance. If the IoT Analytics topic is supposed to be part of the Industrial Data platform one, there is no need to create a new topic as such. Maybe just a clear statement that the Analytics technology in Industrial environment needs to be given significant priority would suffice.

Please provide your response to the 4 main questions above, for each of the subgroups. Please provide concise responses (one page maximum per question). Please provide Please provide concise responses (one page maximum per question).

A response is provided below for the topics that at this point have a relevant priority for Telefónica in the long term and/or for which Telefónica has a clear response based on strategic priorities.

  1. Connected smart factory
  • What is the current landscape of activities in Europe (national initiatives, EU funded activities, other)?

In terms of Industrial Solutions around the Connected Factory there is a frenetic activity at the startup level. While the platforms value propositions are starting to aggregate and the proliferation of IIoT platforms is stabilizing, the number of technology companies looking into the industrial gateways and sensor opportunities is proliferating.

We consider that this situation will stay for some time as the lifetime of the big industrial equipment is usually long, and companies are facing difficulties to make investments in brand new industrial equipment due to global economic situation.

  • Where do we want to go?

    • What kinds of next-generation platforms are needed (if any)?

      The Industrial environment is not conceptually very different from others like the consumer one. The functional modules are pretty much the same. However the main difference lies in the performance required for each of these modules. The latency of the communications needs to be much lower. The sensors and gateways to adapt the information need to be more intelligent, requiring heavier processing capabilities. The databases need to be bigger and the visualization techniques are likely to be more complex.

      One of its main enablers is the creation of data (context) exchange spaces (i.e distributed infrastructures) in the cloud, based on open standards, APIs and code. This way heterogeneous industrial systems might retrieve and provide context information in nearly-real-time in a cost and complexity effective manner.

      Additionally, execution environments of the existing open platforms (like FiWARE platform/APIs), that guarantee that the requirements of security, connectivity, interoperability, storage and high availability are fulfilled are probably the key at this point.

       

    • What kinds of large-scale federating initiatives are needed (if any)?

      One of the main aspects that industrial clients are keeping in mind while considering the implementation of digital technologies in the factory is the issue of trust and perceived security. Industrial customers are not getting cloud-based IoT platform solutions, but on-premise solutions instead, due to the lack of perceived security.

      This choice has implications as it means a limitation on the type, number and level of ambition of the functionalities that can be implemented in a smart connected factory. So a federated factory lab where all the companies can perform validation tests, identify security concerns and propose solutions is instrumental to boost the adoption of proposed architectures and capabilities.

       

    • What concrete gaps/problems could be addressed through platform development and large-scale initiatives at EU level?

      Refer to previous item about security and trust that affects adoption of solutions

       

  • How do we bridge the gap between what we have and what we want to achieve?

    • What concrete platform building initiatives and large-scale pilots can be expected/supported/promoted?

      Living labs initiatives or factory environments to test and validate proposed technologies before taking those to commercial level should be promoted.

 

  • Who are the main stakeholders to be involved?

    • How can PPPs contribute to building platforms?

      PPPs, as one of the most relevant tools for R&D project in collaboration, can contribute through the definition the standards “de facto” that could to accelerate the platforms’ deployment. For instance, FIWARE technology from the PPP “Future of Internet” is an excellent example as facilitator for Industry 4.0. Also the use cases from the PPP focus on 5G network is other good way for testing the potential platforms’ technology.

       

    • How can existing/planned MS initiatives contribute to building platforms?

      Large Scale Pilots based on FIWARE could contribute to build platforms and also provide a framework to standardize data models reusing what is being done in other smart* areas (e.g. Smartcity, SmartAgrifood) and contributing back with industry specifics.  Also new R&D&Innovation initiatives in collaboration are good tools. One of the them is 5TONIC, the first open lab for testing 5G technologies deployed in Madrid and where a lot of H2020 projects are been tested.  Also use cases for Industry 4.0 using 5G standards will be deployed there.

     

 

 

  1. Industrial Data Platform
  • What is the current landscape of activities in Europe (national initiatives, EU funded activities, other)?

Specifically on the area of Industrial Data, at a commercial level three basic phases can identified:

a) Telemetry phase. The industrial assets are given connectivity capabilities in order to get real time information. Objective is to get the real time situation.

b) Data aggregation phase. The platforms can aggregate different sources of information and by putting those together additional value can be extracted.

c) Intelligence phase. Analytical models are developed and applied on the acquired data and data insights are extracted for decision making.

At this point, the data acquisition/telemetry phase itself is already happening. Industrial assets are being connected by commercial solutions. Platforms are also proliferating but still there is no clear winner or set of winners on this regard. However the innovation at a 3-5 years perspective is strongly active on the development of data processing algorithms. This implies relevant innovation on the data storage, pattern detection and machine learning algorithms specifically tailored for industrial assets modelling and prediction.

The first two phases are already happening. In order to push the third phase to happen in such a way that European industry is kept competitive at a global scale, it becomes necessary to promote the tools for the third phase to happen.

 

  • Where do we want to go?

    • What kinds of next-generation platforms are needed (if any)?

      It is instrumental the development of proper environments and testbeds to design and develop the mechanisms and technologies to extract intelligence and insights from industrial data.

      There is a very relevant BDVA PPP whose objectives are very aligned with this need. However an implementation of living labs where companies are offered the space to analyze their data and extract first conclusions to discover the added value of industrial data analysis will help the adoption of digital technologies.

       

    • What kinds of large-scale federating initiatives are needed (if any)?

      In order to really avoid the perception that participating in a joint open European industrial data analysis framework has a potential problem of sharing critical sensitive information to competitors, a federation of private companies (big ones, SMEs, startups) will decrease the risks perceived.

       

    • What concrete gaps/problems could be addressed through platform development and large-scale initiatives at EU level?

      The adoption of the data analytics in the SME and smaller startups for validation of technologies, and the adoption of such technologies in a secure manner by big companies that have a tractor/prescriptor role in the ecosystem

       

  • How do we bridge the gap between what we have and what we want to achieve?

    • What concrete platform building initiatives and large-scale pilots can be expected/supported/promoted?

      New/existing proposals oriented to develop industrial data analytics validation environments with low complexity for potential customers or players to adopt or to try such capabilities.

       

    • How to combine large-scale demonstrators across the EU and across Member States, taking into account already ongoing national developments?

      Define commonalities across data processing needs and participants in such initiatives in national projects. Propose a common extension of existing national initiatives (in the MS that exist those) at an European level.

       

  • Who are the main stakeholders to be involved?

    • How can PPPs contribute to building platforms?

      BDVA PPP can definitely play a key role, but if such activity means a significant deviation from the current objective that BDVA PPP may have, new initiatives may be required.

       

    • How can existing/planned MS initiatives contribute to building platforms?

      If there is any existing national initiative that is developing such open testbed ecosystem for industries to join and try specific implementations, those should be explored to extract best practices or even to extend the approach at European level.

       

    • What are the complementarities/synergies/needs for coordination between EU (PPPs) and MS levels? How to avoid overlaps and strengthen synergies?

      See previous response. A mechanism to consider can be to define a committee composed by the most relevant industrial data processing national initiatives to define what can be leveraged form existing national work and to define the proper approach at European level.

       

Total votes: 1