Improving sustainability through intelligent cargo and adaptive decision making

In the current society, logistics is faced with the challenge to meet more stringent sustainability goals. Shippers and transport service providers both aim to reduce the carbon footprint of their logistic operations. To do so, optimal use of logistics resources and physical infrastructure should be aimed for. An adaptive decision making process for the selection of a specific transport modality, transport provider and timeslot (aimed at minimisation of the carbon footprint) enables shippers to achieve this. This requires shippers to have access to up-to-date capacity information from transport providers (e.g. current and scheduled loading status of the various transport means and information on carbon footprint) and traffic information (e.g. city logistics and current traffic information). A prerequisite is an adequate infrastructure for collaboration and open exchange of information between the various stakeholders in the logistics value chain to obtain the up-to-date information. This paper gives a view on how such an advanced information infrastructure can be realised, currently being developed within the EU iCargo project. The paper describes a reference logistics value chain, including business benefits for each of the roles in the logistics value chain of aiming for sustainability. A case analysis is presented that reflects a practical situation in which the various roles collaborate and exchange information for realizing sustainability goals, using adaptive decision making for selecting a transport modality, transport provider, and timeslot. A high-level overview is provided of the requirements on and technical implementation of the supporting advanced infrastructure for collaboration and open information exchange.In the current society, logistics is faced with the challenge to meet more stringent sustainability goals. Shippers and transport service providers both aim to reduce the carbon footprint of their logistic operations. To do so, optimal use of logistics resources and physical infrastructure should be aimed for. An adaptive decision making process for the selection of a specific transport modality, transport provider and timeslot (aimed at minimisation of the carbon footprint) enables shippers to achieve this. This requires shippers to have access to up-to-date capacity information from transport providers (e.g. current and scheduled loading status of the various transport means and information on carbon footprint) and traffic information (e.g. city logistics and current traffic information). A prerequisite is an adequate infrastructure for collaboration and open exchange of information between the various stakeholders in the logistics value chain to obtain the up-to-date information. This paper gives a view on how such an advanced information infrastructure can be realised, currently being developed within the EU iCargo project. The paper describes a reference logistics value chain, including business benefits for each of the roles in the logistics value chain of aiming for sustainability. A case analysis is presented that reflects a practical situation in which the various roles collaborate and exchange information for realizing sustainability goals, using adaptive decision making for selecting a transport modality, transport provider, and timeslot. A high-level overview is provided of the requirements on and technical implementation of the supporting advanced infrastructure for collaboration and open information exchange.In the current society, logistics is faced with the challenge to meet more stringent sustainability goals. Shippers and transport service providers both aim to reduce the carbon footprint of their logistic operations. To do so, optimal use of logistics resources and physical infrastructure should be aimed for. An adaptive decision making process for the selection of a specific transport modality, transport provider and timeslot (aimed at minimisation of the carbon footprint) enables shippers to achieve this. This requires shippers to have access to up-to-date capacity information from transport providers (e.g. current and scheduled loading status of the various transport means and information on carbon footprint) and traffic information (e.g. city logistics and current traffic information). A prerequisite is an adequate infrastructure for collaboration and open exchange of information between the various stakeholders in the logistics value chain to obtain the up-to-date information. This paper gives a view on how such an advanced information infrastructure can be realised, currently being developed within the EU iCargo project. The paper describes a reference logistics value chain, including business benefits for each of the roles in the logistics value chain of aiming for sustainability. A case analysis is presented that reflects a practical situation in which the various roles collaborate and exchange information for realizing sustainability goals, using adaptive decision making for selecting a transport modality, transport provider, and timeslot. A high-level overview is provided of the requirements on and technical implementation of the supporting advanced infrastructure for collaboration and open information exchange

Sturen op Open Standaarden : een handreiking voor overheidsorganisaties

Het gebruik van open standaarden draagt bij aan het vermogen van overheden, bedrijven en burgers om elektronisch gegevens uit te wisselen en samen te werken. Bovendien zorgt het voor een verminderde afhankelijkheid van leveranciers. Daarom heeft de overheid, o.a. via het Forum Standaardisatie en het programma Nederland Open in Verbinding, het gebruik van open standaarden tot norm verheven. De adoptie van open standaarden blijkt niet zo eenvoudig. Dit komt onder andere omdat er binnen organisaties nog veel bestaande systemen en lopende ontwikkelingen zijn die gebruik maken van gesloten standaarden. Naast stimulering van buitenaf is het daarom van belang dat organisaties zelf aan de slag gaan met de adoptie van open standaarden en de implementatie en het gebruik daarvan in hun specifieke systemen en processen. Organisaties moeten ook zelf kunnen sturen op open standaarden. Daartoe is deze handreiking ontwikkeld

D2 : Kwaliteitsraamwerk voor standaarden

In toenemende mate moeten organisaties kwaliteitsafwegingen maken op het gebied van standaarden. Bijvoorbeeld om een keuze te maken uit een set standaarden of om een standaard op sectorniveau in beheer te nemen. Vanuit het project Integrate is daarom een kwaliteitsraamwerk ontwikkeld waarmee standaarden op een objectieve manier met elkaar kunnen worden vergeleken. Dit rapport beschrijft het raamwerk. Het raamwerk bestaat uit diverse kwaliteitsattributen, waar standaarden op kunnen worden getoetst. Deze attributen komen voort uit verschillende praktijksituaties en modelraamwerken. Voorbeelden zijn bruikbaarheid, openheid en de adoptiegraad. Door het raamwerk te volgen kan een transparante en onderbouwde keuze worden gemaakt. Integrate is een samenwerkingsproject van TNO, Telematica Instituut, Kennisnet en Forum Standaardisatie

Beheer- en OntwikkelModel voor Open Standaarden (BOMOS) versie 2 - Deel 1: De basis. Deel 2: De verdieping

BOMOS is gedreven op een eenvoudige gedachte: beschikbaar maken wat al bestaat maar niet algemeen bekend is. Enerzijds gaat dat om instrumenten (bv. literatuur of tools), anderzijds om de hedendaagse praktijk in standaardisatie. Met name op dat laatste zijn we zeer trots, en was niet mogelijk geweest zonder de enthousiasme bijdrages van de BOMOS werkgroep. Deze personen, zie de colofon voor alle namen, hebben er voor gezorgd dat de ervaringen van veel semantische standaardisatie-initiatieven in Nederland verwerkt zijn in BOMOS. Daarmee is het niet een theoretische verhandeling over standaardisatie geworden, maar laat het juist ook de praktische kant zien. Met daarbij een kijkje in de keuken bij vele semantische standaarden

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases:subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background: Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy. Methods: RESTART was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK that assessed whether starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. For this prespecified subgroup analysis, consultant neuroradiologists masked to treatment allocation reviewed brain CT or MRI scans performed before randomisation to confirm participant eligibility and rate features of the intracerebral haemorrhage and surrounding brain. We followed participants for primary (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) and secondary (ischaemic stroke) outcomes for up to 5 years (reported elsewhere). For this report, we analysed eligible participants with intracerebral haemorrhage according to their treatment allocation in primary subgroup analyses of cerebral microbleeds on MRI and in exploratory subgroup analyses of other features on CT or MRI. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN71907627. Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were enrolled, of whom 525 (98%) had intracerebral haemorrhage: 507 (97%) were diagnosed on CT (252 assigned to start antiplatelet therapy and 255 assigned to avoid antiplatelet therapy, of whom one withdrew and was not analysed) and 254 (48%) underwent the required brain MRI protocol (122 in the start antiplatelet therapy group and 132 in the avoid antiplatelet therapy group). There were no clinically or statistically significant hazards of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage in primary subgroup analyses of cerebral microbleed presence (2 or more) versus absence (0 or 1) (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·30 [95% CI 0·08–1·13] vs 0·77 [0·13–4·61]; pinteraction=0·41), cerebral microbleed number 0–1 versus 2–4 versus 5 or more (HR 0·77 [0·13–4·62] vs 0·32 [0·03–3·66] vs 0·33 [0·07–1·60]; pinteraction=0·75), or cerebral microbleed strictly lobar versus other location (HR 0·52 [0·004–6·79] vs 0·37 [0·09–1·28]; pinteraction=0·85). There was no evidence of heterogeneity in the effects of antiplatelet therapy in any exploratory subgroup analyses (all pinteraction>0·05). Interpretation: Our findings exclude all but a very modest harmful effect of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage in the presence of cerebral microbleeds. Further randomised trials are needed to replicate these findings and investigate them with greater precision. Funding: British Heart Foundation