Advanced Research Program Management Tool with Automated Citation Tracking
"Discover how Team P5T's innovative program permissions tool streamlines research program tracking, grants management, and citation tracking for enhanced efficiency and auditability. Learn about the comprehensive scope, requirements, design, and testing processes involved in this cutting-edge project."
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Team P5T Presentation, Proposal, and Paper Program Permissions Tool Sponsor: Richard Laughlin Alexander Kelley James Fitzgerald Jacob Siegel Nathan Claes, PhD US Veterans Affairs : Center of Excellence for Suicide Prevention
*Agenda Project Background Scope and Requirements Process Methodology Design Testing and Risks Future Plans Reflection Questions
Project Background Program Tracking o Program Status o Storage of related documents Reviews and Approval Tracking Webcrawler o Grants o Citations
Scope Web application that tracks research programs, their artifacts, and archives all content for auditing purposes. Web crawler that finds citations and grants, updating the web application automatically.
Requirements Elicitation Started with given project description Met several times to ask for clarifications and to break down into individual requirements.
Requirements Technology Requirements Functional Requirements Security Requirements o FIPS 197 Accessibility Requirements o Section 508
Technology * Required
Process Model Spiral / Evolutionary Prototyping o Frequent prototypes for sponsor evaluation o Frequent risk analysis o Generate different paths to reach win condition
Release Schedule Release Name Start Date End Date R1 - Core Web Functionality 9/25 10/30 R2 - Crawler Design / Risk Mitigation 10/30 11/13 R3 - Web Functionality Refinement 11/13 12/11
R1 Schedule Task Anticipated Date Database Tables & Domain Model Classes 10/7 HTML Layouts for CRUD & Glue Pages 10/14 Form Usability & Accessibility 10/16 Layout & Functionality Refactoring 10/21 Cleanup & Bug Fixes 10/30 Goal: Minimize risk of errors in requirements elicitation.
R2 Schedule Task Anticipated Date Look into APIs & Frameworks (Google Scholar & Springer) 11/6 Start implementing a single crawler 11/13 Goal: Minimize risk from lack of expertise in building data mining tools.
R3 Schedule Task Anticipated Date Complete functionality missing from R1. 11/20 Thanksgiving 11/27 Replace Separate Page Functionality with Modals 12/4 Goal: Incorporate sponsor feedback.
Metrics Product Metrics System Response Time Query Response Time Comment Density Process Metrics Worked Hours Risk Time Between Cycles Time / Phase / Week Future Crawler Speed Links / Crawled Page
Design Process Incrementally and Iteratively adjusted during each release.
Database Simplified Typing Specifications Researcher -First Name -Middle Initial -Last Name -Primary Affiliation -Title -Phone -E-mail -Secondary Affiliation(s) -Title(s) -Phone(s) -E-mail(s) +Related Products +Related Grants
Testing User acceptance testing UI Main program features
Current Status R1 has been delivered to the sponsor. R2 has been completed and the results have been used to adjust the risk assessment. R3 is currently in-progress.
Future Plans Finish web client development. Design and build web crawler o Finds citations and grants
What Went Well? Good team communication Good rapport with sponsor Completed most of the client requirements in two cycles
What Went Poorly? Minor schedule slide o Artificial deadlines Some environment setup problems o Delay with VM setup o MS SQL issues Metric collection / usage issues.
