Solapas secundarias
3. Pilot Feedback - Long [WATERVERSE Project Pilots]: Submission #29
The Plain text page displays a submission's general information and data as plain text. Ver vídeo
Información del envío
Número del envío: 29
ID del envío: 498
Submission UUID: 546bf342-9006-48f2-8d26-7562fcfb2794
Submission URI: /es/projects/waterverse/waterverse_pilots_feedback_long_submit
Creado: Mié, 27/03/2024 - 12:56
Completado: Mié, 27/03/2024 - 13:00
Modificado: Lun, 15/04/2024 - 20:47
Remote IP address: 31.153.108.250
Enviado por: Anónimo
Idioma: English
Is draft: No
Página actual: Completo
Information and Consent ----------------------- *[WaterVerse Project Pilots] Pilot feedback - Long* *Target responders: *All WATERVERSE Pilot Participants Please, read the Participant Information Sheet [1] and provide your explicit consent below before moving to the pilot participation and feedback provision. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The pre-assessment questionnaire requires approximately 10 minutes to be completed. [1] https://public.phoebeinnovations.com/projects/waterverse/information_sheet Statement of Informed Consent ----------------------------- I have read the above statements and I hereby provided my explicit consent.: Sí [Optional] I agree that my personal data can be used for contacting me in the context of inviting me in future events of interest, related to the WATERVERSE.: No Name and Date ------------- Full name:: Constantina Anastasiou Date of consent:: Mié, 03/27/2024 - 00:00 Profile of participant ---------------------- Pilot site/country: Cyprus I participate in this pilot exercise with the role:: Operator (user of WATERVERSE WDME) at the water organisation Affiliated Organisation: WBL Type of affiliated organisation:: Water utility Email [optional]:: {Empty} Telephone [optional]:: {Empty} Page 1 ------ Functional suitability ---------------------- The functionality of the tool with regards to the user requirements is complete.: 3 The implementation of data and information transfers through the interface functions is correct.: 4 Low frequency of failures to exchange data between the component and other involved components/tools.: 3 No deviation between the actual and reasonably expected results.: 3 Low frequency of encountering inaccurate results/behaviour.: 3 functional_suitability_average: 3 Reliability ----------- The component/tool was operational and available when required for use.: 3 The component/tool satisfied user needs for using it under normal operation.: 3 I felt that the component/tool’s functionality was giving expected results and at expected time.: 3 Low frequency of breaks of the component/tool.: 4 Low degree of appearance of failures/faults during the testing/evaluation period.: 4 When a failure occurred, no much time was required before gradual start-up of the component/tool.: 3 Sufficient capability of the involved functionality in restoring itself after an abnormal event or at request.: 3 reliability_average: 3 Usability --------- I am able to recognise whether the component/tool is appropriate for fulfilling my requirements.: 3 Within a reasonable time of training, I felt confident in using the tool with effectiveness, efficiency, freedom from risk and satisfaction in the specified context of use.: 3 The component/tool offers features that make it easy to operate and control.: 3 I am able to control the tool and its operation is within my expectations.: 3 The component/tool has sufficient attractiveness of the user interface.: 4 A sufficiently high proportion of the user interface elements could be customised to my satisfaction.: 4 The component/tool offered sufficient support in avoiding errors when using its functionality.: 3 usability_average: 3 Page 2 ------ Performance efficiency ---------------------- Satisfactory response time of the functionality.: 4 Throughput of the operations close to the specified requirements.: 3 performance_efficiency_average: 4 Page 3 ------ Compatibility ------------- Sufficient use of standard application programming interfaces.: 3 Sufficient openness and ease of use of the interfaces.: 4 compatibility_average: 4