meta data for this page
  •  

This is an old revision of the document!


  1. - Ordered List Item======…………=====
Group member:

IT: Fabian Moreno IM: Jesus Mario Verdugo IM: Enrique Batani

Meeting of the 14th Oct 2014:

Brainstorming to find ideas on open data service:

Transport

  • Application area
  • Buses are empty for certain time schedules on a daily basis.
  • Optimize costs of transport
  • Reach areas and streets that currently don’t have public transportation routes.
  • Restrictions
  • Maintain SLA.
  • Not reducing the frequency of time table.
  • Offering as much seats as needed.
  • Maintain or reduce user price.
  • Work methodology
  • Feasibility study
  • Value proposition
  • Assigning different bus sizes to different routes or time frames.

Careers

  • Application area
  • Problem. uncertainty to decide what to study
  • Needs. Improve assertiveness of career choosing
  • Restrictions
  • People chooses money rather than their fields of interest
  • Depending on the career the courses are more expensive.
  1. People is limited to study something that offers them a job where they live.
  2. Local recognition of the area of studies
  3. Perceived difficulty of the area.
  4. Misconceptions of the careers.
  5. Preparation for the admission tests.
  • Beurocracy and corruption in the admission process
  • Work methodology
  • Feasibility study
  • Value proposition

A platform to advice high school new graduates to find the right career based on certain criteria, such as afinity, average salary of graduates, number of vacancies available in the labor market, programs offered in universities, and tuition fees.

Politics

  • Detect and prevent corruption in politics
  • Identify signs or traces of corrupted activity.
  • Information gathering must be free
  • Value proposition
  • Raise of flags when identifying suspicious behavior
Outcomes of meeting

After evaluating the possible projects and their impact in the society we decided that the topic “Politics” with our proposal to raise flags in possible corruption cases is the most relevant.

Task
  • Finalize reading all training material in Open Data.
  • Identify more opportunities for the political model.
  • Working method selection.

Our next meeting is on 27.10.2014.

Meeting of the 27th Oct 2014:

Organizing presentation based on elements of elevator pitch
  • problem
  • solution
  • customer
  • segment
  • finance
  • team
  • competitors
  • milestones
Further development of Politics

Needs

  • Corruption
  1. Definition
  2. Types of corruption

Conflict of interests, Influence peddling, Purchases, Fake name registering.

  • Transparency
  1. Corruption

Approach

  • Algorithm
  1. Definition

Politics, Patterns

  1. Input: open data
  2. Output: flags
  • System
  1. software
  2. machine
  3. propietary
  4. closed

Benefit

  • Common good
  • People
  • Values
  • Reducing time in analysis for corruption
  1. Avoid losing time where there is no risk of corruption
  2. Look for corruption only where there are flags
  • Customers and monetization
  • monetization
  1. contractor
  2. politicians

Warn about their mistakes and risk movements, Advise on their competitors.

  1. media

Competition

  • Affected
  1. Politicians
  2. Administration
  3. Third parties
  • Other measures
  • Constraints
Work on hook arguments for elevator pitch

Corruption is one of the leading concerns in the . But, what if we could identify these signs and backtrack over its trace until we can determine whether a suspicious behavior is an actual act of corruption? we know about the corruption from the media, but what about the corruption we never get to hear from?

Task
  • Add more elements for elevator pitch.
  • Add supportive statistics.
  • Review more information about NABC.
  • Work on better hook arguments

Our next meeting is on 29.10.2014.

Sources of Opendata
  • Civil registration
  • Registration of companies
  • Tax Offices
  • Institutes of statistics
  • Budget and salary of Politicians and public workers

* Depending on the country the sources and their URLs vary.

Meeting on 29.10.2014
Outcome of the meeting

Statistics that support model:

  • Research has shown us that people's perceptions offer a reliable estimate of the nature and scope of corruption in a given country. By its nature, corruption is secretive and complex.
  • The perceptions of country analysts, business people or the general public form the basis of our corruption indices, the Corruption Perceptions Index and the Global Corruption Barometer of the Transparency Organization are two reliable sources to measure the global corruption.
  • Global Corruption Barometer 2013 (Results of a Transparency International survey of more than 114,000 respondents in 107 countries)

Key Findings:

  • 27% report having paid a bribe in the last 12 months when interacting with key public institutions and services
  • The police and judiciary are seen as two most bribery-prone
  • Two out of three people believe that personal contacts and relationships help to get things done in the public sector in their country
  • 54% think their government is largely or entirely run by groups acting in their own interest rather than for the benefit of the citizens
  • Nearly 9 in 10 surveyed say they would act against corruption
  • The majority of people said they would be willing to speak up and report an incident of curruption
  • Two-thirds of those asked to pay a bribe say they refused
  • 53% of the people surveyed think that corruption has increased or increased a lot over the last two years.
  • Political parties were seen to be the most corrupt institution, scoring 3.8 on the scale of one to five
  • 54% consider their government to be ineffective at fighting corruption
  • 67% believe that ordinary people can make the difference in the fight against corruption
Sources of information

Development of Idea

Corruption is one of the leading concerns in the democratic world. Its perception varies among countries but there is one constant: most of the corrupting actions undergo unnoticed and are not prosecuted. Authorities can act against corruption once suspicious actions are known. Unfortunately most of these actions will never be investigated. But, what if we could automatically identify these signs and backtrack on their traces until we can determine whether a suspicious behavior is an actual act of corruption?

People with different levels of power can exploit the vulnerabilities of the system to benefit other than the common good. Politicians, public workers, contractors… all are subject to behave inappropriately. They can abuse the system in different ways, namely by conflict of interests, influence peddling, fake name registering or purchases. Once they are caught an investigation begins to trace all the cables connecting their suspicious behavior.

We have an idea to invert this flow. Suspicious behavior is analyzed to raise flags that would lead to further investigation. This is automatically done by an algorithm that takes data from different sources as the input to our system and analyzes it dynamically to produce reports that give the details of the mentioned suspicious behavior and their connections. This input is mainly based on open data offered by public institutions but will also be improved by pattern analysis so that the system refines its accuracy and improves its output over time.

This system is proprietary and is managed by our organization. We offer the reports in exchange for money to those interested in the information we can provide. We have the ownership of the machines and software and it will never be public knowledge given its closed nature.

We offer different value propositions depending on the customer segmentation. Potential customers are: Government

  • Unordered List Item
  • Public instituions
  • Media
  • NGOs
  • Concerned third parties

Our system reduces the costs of time and effort for our customers when it comes to investigation. It also saves common wealth by reducing inadequate spendings.

There is not clear competence in this market, but there are environmental factors that would potentially constrain the scope or deployment of our system. Some politicians would not like to be analyzed because they can feel threatened. Some others would not agree with this systematic approach.

Next meeting on 03-NOV-14

Meeting on.......

  • ……
  • …..
  • ….
  • …..
Final presentation on ......