Not sure what to describe here

Evaluation of the proposed trend fusion algorithm (math heavy)

Investigate the efficiency of the evacuation plan: 3 steps with multiple iterations; 1: simulate, 2: analyse simulation, e.g. top-down analysis methods such as fault-tree analysis, 3: new simulations

Two tool prototypes that measure the proposed metrics:Performs the measurement after the execution of the MAS from its logsPerforms the measurement during the execution using Application Programming Interfaces (API).

The exercise had three evaluation processes. First, a criterion referenced written test on the content of the lectures, prereadings, and exercises to measure the extent to which the first objective, understanding key concepts, had been accomplished. The pretest and posttest were identical, and at the debriefing, before the posttest, we went over the answers to the questions. We believed that this would reduce stress and, by multiple repetitions of key points, serve as a tool to teach thepoints we wanted the students to remember. The results of the pretest and posttest were analyzed by paired t tests (two-tailed) using SPSS software.Second, written and verbal comments from the students and facilitators about their experience were requested. The third measure was an attitude scale, whose purpose was to assess changes in student attitudes about working with other professionals and about their roles in a disaster. The analysis of these results revealed that the attitude instrument did not have adequate reliability, and thus we do not have valid data regarding the attainment of Objective 4.

To determine what is critical information for the CCRRS we divided the approach into critical information, i.e. the minimum SSA needs of the CCRRS, and action-triggering information, i.e. the minimum SA needs of an organization or actor.

Archival ERT training videos were analyzed for information that was transcribed on a dry-erase whiteboard (focus board) during simulated offshore emergencies.

Criteria-based evaluation of DO4MGClarity, Consistency/coherence, Conciseness, Expendability/extendibility, Correctness, Minimal ontological commitment, Completeness

All data analyses were carried out using SPSS v. 14.0. Reliability, in the form of internal consistency, was assessed via Cronbach a coefficients (and we also report the lowest item–total correlation obtained for each item). Cronbach a values range between 0 and 1 with values >0.70 typically considered adequate in research contexts. Content validity was assessed via Spearman r correlation coefficients between different core skills as rated by the trainer nurse. Non-parametric coefficients were computed due to small sample size. Medium-sized correlations between skills will provide evidence for adequate content validity. Correlations between trainer and trainees’ ratings across skills were reported as well.

All data analyses were carried out using SPSS. Reliability assessed via Cronbach’s alpha coefficients.