The following table lists the Embedded Systems Australia cluster project proposals after the Technology Roadmapping Workshop, and an initial assessment at the Project Appraisal Workshop on 11/4/2008.
The table is arranged into four separate groups:
- Major Projects.
- Smaller Projects.
- Major Underlying Infrastructure Projects.
- Strategic Activities.
Within each group, projects are listed in order of their scores (note, however there is considerable overlap).
An excellent outcome would be to establish one major project and two 'smaller' projects this year. However, we need to be flexible; a different mix of project types/sizes will be possible if support is strong.
A key goal is to create commercially viable projects that are primarily industry led. It is envisaged that as project concepts develop they will need further market analysis and benchmarking against existing activities overseas.
[Press Ctrl F5 in your browser to update the list from previous viewings.]
Embedded Systems Australia is conducting a Project Appraisal Workshop 'Stage 2' from 8:30am-14:00 Monday 21/4/2008 at Level 47, Trade & Investment Centre, MLCCentre, 19 Martin Place Sydney. This is one of the key events of the ESA calendar, as we seek to prioritise projects and form tentative project teams.
The projects listed below will be the focus of this event.
All stakeholder and interested parties are welcome to attend. If you can't attend in person, please consider sending a company representative. You do not have to have participated in prior workshops to attend. Please email ESA @nicta.com.au for details.
| ID | Project Links | Score | Comment | 'Champions' | Suggested Potential Collaborators |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major Projects | |||||
| 009 | Next Generation In-Car Infotainment / Telematics System | 43.4 ± 5.5 | Indicative score (8 respondants). Needs more understanding of potential collaboration with AT Signature 2 project. |
|
|
| 007 & 011 | Home Automation / Management | 39.2 ± 3.9 |
|
|
|
| 007 | Next Generation Home Control/Media System | See Above | |||
| 011 | Home Management System | See Above | |||
| 005a | Autonomous Vehicles | 38.9 ± 3.6 |
|
|
|
| 005 | Autonomous Underwater Vehicle | See Above | |||
| Lower Ranked Major Projects... | |||||
| Smart Vehicle (Police) | 30.9 ± 5.8 | Perhaps this could be included with 009 Next Generation In-car Infotainment/Telematics? |
|
|
|
| Smart Ambulance/Bed | 27.4 ± 5.4 | Need to further explore this topic. |
|
|
|
| Smaller Projects | |||||
| 006 | Movie Purchase Kiosk with Wireless Download | 39.3 ± 3.2 |
|
|
|
| 010 | Smart Transport and Roads Sensor Project | 38.7 ± 4.0 |
|
|
|
| Lower Ranked Smaller Projects... | |||||
| 008 | Secure User Interface Elements | 27.0 ± 4.1 | Requires more information and a compelling sales pitch. |
|
|
| 014 | The Mesh | 21.8 ± 6.8 | Need to refine project pitch, clarifying details and differentiation of application. |
|
|
| 001 | Personal Flight Recorder | 21.6 ± 3.7 | Niche application. |
|
|
| Major Underlying Infrastructure Projects | |||||
| 012 & 013 | Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) Platform | 38.4 ± 5.4 |
|
|
|
| 013 | Portable Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) Platform | See Above | |||
| 002 | Modular Wireless Sensor Networks | 30.5 ± 6.4 |
|
|
|
| Strategic Activities | |||||
| 003 | ARTEMIS Embedded Systems Design | 37.7 ± 6.1 | Pursue this independently of projects. |
|
|
| 004 | Embedded Systems CRC | 36.2 ± 7.4 | Consider at a later date. |
|
|
Notes on the above table:
- Scores are preliminary assesments done at the Project Appraisal Workshop Stage 1.
- Lowest possible score was 11, highest was 55, an average score is 33.
- Scores are based on 7-15 (depending on project) score sheet assessments; not all respondents scored every project.
- ± variations are 95% confidence intervals: based on the variation in scores (i.e. Std Deviation) and the number of respondents, the 95% confidence interval indicates the confidence in the calculated average result.
If the Average = 38.0 and the ±95% Confidence = 2.6, the result is:
Average = 38.0 ± 2.6 with 95% confidence.
That is, we are 95% confident (assuming our sample is random, normally distributed etc etc) that the result wouldn't change beyond this range if we added more respondents.
Therefore, results with overlapping ± confidence intervals are equivalent.
The following table lists the original cluster project proposals as first proposed. Click on each name to see more.
[Press Ctrl F5 in your browser to update the list from previous viewings.]