Based on the comparison of the previous
architectures, the first remark, which one can note, is
that all the proposed designs remained in the state of
design without implementation or real test.
Indeed, the first architecture (Chalh Ridouane,
2015), composed of blocks, contains a block of
hydraulic models for data processing, a block for
simulations, and a central block relating to the big
data core.
In the second architecture (Ai Ping, 2014), the
authors proposed a framework that aims to make
decisions based on acquisition and processing data
from several databases and accommodates the user
from the acquisition phase to decision making,
always passing through a relative layer of big data.
In the third architecture (Bai Y, 2017), the authors
propose a platform that always follows the process
from data acquisition for decision-making and a
centre for the unification and standardization of data,
which come from several business databases.
The authors, in the final design (Deepthipriya R
Pillai (2019), present a model oriented towards water
leaks, with a treatment model and prediction models
but, like the last two architectures, always follow the
process of Acquisition Treatment Decision.
Figure 7: Comparison of big data water resources
architecture.
After bibliographic research on the authors of
these architectures, it seems to us that the authors,
without any real implementation or experimentation
in a real or quasi-real environment, proposed these
architectures.
This observation raises questions about the
possible obstacles and challenges to be presented to
successfully introduce big data to the water
information system of public actors in charge of water
resources management
After comparing the different architectures of the
authors, we came to the following conclusions for a
water information decisional system:
The architecture must be structured according to
the flow of data processing flows
It includes, as input, mechanisms for the
acquisition of several data formats from several
business databases
It must have a block for the standardization of
data based on the concept of big data
It must contain a layer for multidimensional data
analysis
It must have a decision-making aid module
The treatment of articles through the nvivo tool
allowed us to establish the following degree of
similarity:
Figure 8: Degree of similarity of the articles.
Based on the above, we can propose the following
architecture for a water decisional information
system:
Figure 9: Proposed architecture.
The architecture, therefore proposed in Figure 7,
results from the comparison of the different
architectures studied. It is explained as follows:
The data from business databases that contain
data relating to water resources (measurement
data, quality, GIS, etc.) are integrated into a
standardization module.
This module allows the processing and
unification of the data format according to the
big data concept.