Half way there - please try to think about the specific problem that you are using this idiom to solve!

I still think this is a mix ... the ERDS isn't really used by the modeller is it - it's used by the designer? - As a visualization support provider - I want to design a visualization system in a domain that is new to me during an emergency - So that epidemiological modellers can use visualization effectively and efficiently to understand and develop their models Is that a useful angle?

I have seen this text a few times - can we get an example data set and a link to the source? I just don't think a general audience of scientists will know what a "a forest of temporal trees (u, v, t)" is - we need to help them understand and see that they may use these kinds of things ... with good descriptions and wide examples!

I still think the "forest of temporal trees" description is a bit cryptic and mystical. A node is a person with COVID. A tree is a network of people infected by one single person. A forest is a term used to describe multiple trees, each beginning with a different infector. Etc?

The idea here is to describe the EXISTING IDIOM - so, Design Study Lite, or Requirements ANALYSIS, or whatever you used as the starting point. What is it supposed to do? Then in 4 - we see where this came from (the references). Then in 5 - we see where it has been used (other projects, other domains). Then in 6 - you show us how you used it! So this feels a little incongruous here.

I'd love to hear a more focussed description of what you did in using and adapting an existing approach. This would be informative.

Can you add citations? More importantly I think the original comments still apply. Happy to chat about this - perhaps we can connect?

I think this needs rewriting - have a look at my idiom notes - circulated today!

See above - this needs to be a description of the idiom, the original piece of knowledge, and why it might apply, rather than a description of what you did.

E.g. DSM was introduced by Sedlmair et al. It is intended to ... DSM lite addresses some concerns with DSM when time is short and aims to be a discount method for rapid application ...

We need examples of where the idiom has been used to see how it applies to other contexts beyond SCRC. we'd like scientists to see how it might be used more widely.

Again, the comment stands. "DSM has been used widely, to help Poetry Scholars explore sound and language; to help evolutionary biologists compare genetic sequences; to help military vehicle designers assess vulnerabilities in their armour. It is broadly applicable to a range of domains and visualization problems but takes time and so does not map directly or effectively to emergency situations. DSM lite aims to address this by ... X,Y,Z ... and has been used in ... W,V,U"

I feel as though I need to apologise - but I found this very hard to make sense of and comment on. I think it could be useful but needs quite a lot of work. I hope the comments help.

There is some really good reflection at the end - but it really doesn't fit the model we need well at the moment. Can you try to work out what the angle is here. What is the idiom? User Story may well be : - as a vis designer - I need to establish how to inject visualization into a modelling workflow - to help modellers developed complex models during a pandemic Idiom could be DSM, or DSM lite - but we need mush more description of what you would do given this idiom to make progress, and then how this didn't work, and then what you did as a result ... to make this fit!

First up - this is all relevant and there is lots that is good in here. That’s clear. I want this to work. But, I think that to align it with the approach we are taking, the framing needs to be around something old (DSM) rather than something new (ERDSM). That this is not the case at present causes problems (with consistency, explanation, alignment) throughout the notebook (in my view!) So I suggest that the title and focus needs to be the OLD thing : DSM Scientists might find this useful (particularly if it is well described and has been shown to work in science across domains. in non-emergency situations described in 5). The description and reflection need to show how this was applied, manipulated and perhaps even shown to fail, and the new approach emerges from description and reflection (particularly recommendations) in 6 and 7 - the “what we did with DSM” and “what we know about DSM in ER” bits. You can then write this new idea up fully in another paper somewhere! That’s really the model we are trying to take. Now there is a complexity, in that you are trying to address a user story through DSM - so this is a bit hierarchical (I won’t dare describe it as a tree). So: 1. DSM - see my suggested user story 2. DATA - forest of trees, but add a note to say - “The models that were the focus of our efforts here involved …” 3. Describe and introduce DSM (see comments in section 4!) - and DSML? 4. Add the references 5. Give examples of where DSM has been used (and even how long it takes - not an emergency) and DSML? 6. OK _ here you add the “As an epidemiological modeller” user story here to show what they are trying to do with the data and how you were trying to use DSM - use DSM concepts 7. Here talk about DSM, a new approach for DSM in ER, etc. You do lots of this really well! I hope the re-framing helps.

This is very abstract and hard to relate to the idiom or the user story ... 🤔 Needs work!

This feels is incomplete and not particularly well focussed. How did you use DSM? How did what you do vary from DSM? What did you do that was new and beyond DSM? You might even want to say what your new ideas is! I like DSM4E - for emergencies!

Great - knowledge convergence. See McCurdy et al on Action Design Research ! ;)

This should be reflection ON the idiom (DSM) IN the context of RAMP. So , the more you can mention DSM concepts the better. How did you use phase, did you skip phases, were the roles the same, did you need new roles, how many of the 32 pitfalls seem particularly relevant in an emergency?

Is CASTing particularly difficult? Do DESIGN and IMPLEMENT occur concurrently - are they separable?

Are DISCOVER, DESIGN, IMPLEMENT, DEPLOY separable, or do these collapse as the increasing sense of urgency develop? Is it even appropriate or sensible to devlop a system in an emergency?

CT : Can you check first sentence of second para?

OK, turned this into two sentences, reads much clearer.

Great - Key aspect of role is to scan possibilities quickly and search for high impact low cost solutions.

On the first para - this is clearly part of DSM. broad consideration space / narrow proposal space? See also PF20, PF6 and PF8 - should we even be doing STUDY in an emergency, or just design?

This is fantastic: "Aim first to embed VIS expertise in the workflow not the tools -- consider not only the visualisations or software as visualisation contribution, but visualisation researchers' expertise in thinking visually about complex problem spaces, and look for ways to embed this knowledge in the process" Final bullet point - HOW? Recommendations (as this takes time in a rapidly changing environment).

I like this a lot - helpful. "Embed in workflow" seems an important first step and good precursor to tool building. Immerse. See Hall et al!

We need names please, including modelling collaborators. BibTex format if possible! Dykes, Jason and Chen, Min and Abdul-Rahman, Alfie and Turkay, Cagatay and Vardy, Jamie Like that!