GCRI · Labs
实地与实验室试验平台
A testbed is a controlled place to try something before it meets the world: a laboratory rig, a pilot plant, a field trial plot, a living lab in a neighbourhood, a regulatory sandbox. Testbeds carry risks of their own, to staff, participants, sites and neighbours, and their evidence is only as useful as the match between test and conditions of use. This page sets out how testbeds are designed, permitted, made safe and read, and who decides when a result may move on.
工作如何开展。
Testbed operations
Field and lab testbeds · Field lab coast · Campaign 5
Sensor deployment
示意海岸线
Sensors
| S-01 tide | 94 | 0.2 | Nominal |
| S-04 salinity | 91 | 0.4 | Recalibrate |
| S-07 wave | 91 | 0.2 | Nominal |
Sensor vs reference
图Testbed operations: example names and illustrative values, not a record or a live system.
Field and lab testbeds: how the risk develops.
Test environments, safety and site permissions. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
The test is not the world
Laboratory conditions remove the variability of real sites, users and maintenance. A technology that performs on a rig may fail in heat, dust, intermittent power or untrained hands. The gap between test and operating environment is what readiness levels try to name.
Hazards travel with the experiment
Pressurised 系统, biological agents, chemicals, batteries, drones and autonomous machines can harm people outside the lab once trials move to the field. 风险评估 has to follow the experiment to each new site and each new configuration.
Permission is layered
Field work can need landowner consent, environmental and planning permits, aviation or radio authorisations, biosafety approval and community agreement. A missing permission can halt a trial midway or make its data unusable.
Living labs involve people
When a trial runs in homes, streets, wards or workplaces, residents become participants. Consent, data protection, benefit sharing and exit arrangements decide whether the evidence is ethical and whether the community will host another trial.
How field and lab testbeds is modelled, measured and tested.
模型、其假设、数据和不确定性，以科学家或工程师会核查的形式呈现。结构遵循已发表的方法。所取数值仅为示意，不是研究发现。
模型、方程与假设
The model structure used for field and lab testbeds, the assumptions it makes and how each is tested.
Ri = f(Hi, Ei, Vi, Ci)危害、风险暴露、脆弱性和应对能力EAL = ∑k pk · Lk对年概率为 pkxt+1 = A xt + B ut + εtA carries the couplings, u the shock, ε the error| 假设 | 为何制作 | 如何检验 |
|---|---|---|
| 在一次事件中，危害与暴露相互独立 | 使损失积分保持可计算 | 与基于联合记录拟合的 copula 进行比较 |
| 耦合在工作点附近是线性的 | 让冲击通过 A 传播 | 在线性范围之外施加扰动并比较 |
| 脆弱性曲线可以在不同地点之间迁移使用 | 很少有本地曲线可用 | 在有观测损失的地方据此进行验证 |
- 输入
- 带溯源信息的版本化数据集
- 成果
- 分布，绝不是单一数字
- 代码
- 连同模型卡和测试一起发布
- 复现
- 相同的数据、代码、环境和随机种子
Testbeds test technology in each domain’s real conditions.
Testbed results feed the Labs 证据系列. Readiness is described with TRLs, which measure maturity, not suitability.
- Testbed sites with owners’ terms.
- Negative results.
衡量什么，以及衡量得如何。
每个指标都注明其单位、频率、背后的来源类型以及数值将附带的证据标签。此处不显示数值：数值由计划依据其自身权限提供。
| 指标 | 单位 | 节奏 | 来源类型 | 标签 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Technology readiness level at entry and exit | level on a named TRL scale | per trial | Assessment against NASA, EU or ISO 16290 definitions | 已声明 |
| Independent readiness review | percent of readiness claims reviewed outside the team | 年度 | Programme review records | 观测 |
| Operating-environment fidelity | ordinal scale from laboratory to operational | per trial | Test plan against the stated use environment | 估算 |
| Permits in force before start | percent of required permits | per trial | Permit register | 已发布统计 |
| Safety incidents and near misses | count per thousand test hours | 每月 | Incident reporting system | 已报告 |
| Participant consent coverage | percent of participants with recorded consent | per trial | Consent records | 观测 |
| Site restoration completed | percent of field sites restored to the agreed condition | per trial | Site closure reports | 已报告 |
证据来自何处。
具名公共数据集与机构记录，各自注明许可类别。依协议获得的来源仅按其条款使用，绝不再次发布。
| 来源 | 它提供什么 | 许可类别 |
|---|---|---|
| ESFRI roadmap and landscape analysis | European research infrastructures, their scope and access conditions | Free access, attribution |
| MERIL portal (European Science Foundation) | Inventory of European research infrastructures open to external users | Free access, terms of use |
| European Network of Living 实验室 member directory | Living labs, their domains and contact points | Free access, terms of use |
| Testing and Experimentation Facilities (European Commission, Digital Europe Programme) | Sector testbeds for artificial intelligence in manufacturing, health, agri-food and cities | Public programme records |
| CORDIS（欧盟委员会） | Funded projects, pilot sites, deliverables and reported readiness | Free and open, CC BY |
| Global BioLabs (King’s College London and George Mason University) | Mapped high-containment laboratories and their biosafety governance | Free access, attribution |
| National permit and incident registers | Field-trial permits, release authorisations and reportable incidents | By agreement with each authority |
由谁决定，以及证据服务于什么。
实验室 prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| 谁来决定 | 问题 | 本页面服务的证据 |
|---|---|---|
| Institutional biosafety and safety committees | Whether an experiment may run at a given containment level or field site | Hazard assessment, containment design, training and incident records |
| Environmental, aviation and spectrum regulators | Whether a field release, flight or transmission may be authorised | Test plan, site description, mitigation and monitoring arrangements |
| Programme managers at funding agencies | Whether a technology has earned the next readiness gate and its funding | Readiness evidence per level, independent review, fidelity statement |
| Host communities and landowners | Whether to host a trial, on what terms, and how it ends | Plain-language trial description, data use, benefits and restoration plan |
该主题产生的产出
- Test plans stating the operating environment, the hazards and the exit criteria for each readiness level
- Permit and safety registers kept with the trial record
- Readiness assessments with evidence attached to each level claimed
- Site agreements and closure records for field and living-lab trials
What experts ask before a test begins.
- How close are the testbed’s conditions to the real setting where the result will be used?
- What can be controlled, what can only be observed, and what is unknown?
- What could go wrong for people, equipment or the environment, and how is it contained?
- Who owns the site and the data, and who has granted permission to use them?
- How will the testbed be returned to its original state when the work ends?
Why the gap between test and reality matters.
The value of a testbed lies in control: it removes or fixes some sources of variation so that the effect of interest can be seen. The cost of control is realism. A water treatment process that works in a laboratory may fail with real source water that varies by season; a forecasting tool that performs well on historical data may degrade when the system changes. Engineers call this the validity trade-off, and it is never eliminated, only managed.
Field testbeds narrow the gap but bring new risks. They involve communities, landowners, operators and regulators, each with legitimate interests. They can disrupt services, collect personal data or affect ecosystems. Safety cases, consent and permissions are therefore part of the science, not administration around it.
系统 engineering offers a staged path: component tests, integrated tests in simulation, limited field trials and wider pilots, with criteria for moving between stages.
How testbeds are characterised.
- 01
Testbed description
A record of the environment, instruments, calibration, boundary conditions and known deviations from the target setting.
- 02
Hazard and safety analysis
Structured identification of failure modes and controls, drawing on 系统工程 practice. It reduces but does not remove residual risk.
- 03
Simulation and digital models
Virtual testbeds that allow many runs at low cost. Their results are only as good as the model’s validation.
- 04
Readiness staging
Explicit criteria for moving from bench to simulation to field. Staging helps decisions but readiness levels are coarse and can hide important differences.
A testbed result shows performance under the tested conditions. Generalising beyond them requires further evidence and is reported as a separate claim.
Where this page’s references lead.
阅读本页时所对照的机构和文件。状态和版本会变化；每个链接都指向发布机构。
问题与解答。
What does a technology readiness level measure?
What is a living lab?
Who is responsible for safety in a field trial?
Is a regulatory sandbox an exemption from the law?
Does Labs own testbed sites?
Can a company test a product in a Labs testbed?
Are simulation testbeds treated differently?
从本页贡献证据。
报告 is the Consortium’s quarterly publication. What you know about this subject can become evidence, a case or a correction in the next edition, credited to you and published under CC BY 4.0 where it is your own work.
- 电子邮件网关 GW-GCRI从本页发送证据、更正、案例、方法、审查、翻译或概况投稿。它会带上本页标签送达，由负责的编辑接收。
- Zenodo开放存缴存缴并提交到社区用您的 ORCID iD 在 Zenodo 上发布您自己的记录，然后提交到那里的 Reports 社区。由策展人审核；DOI 仍归您所有。
- 报告GCRI查看所有贡献方式贡献类型、各自的评审方式、您获得的署名、许可协议，以及绝不接受的内容。
切勿发送个人数据、敏感基础设施细节或您无权分享的任何内容。贡献在使用前会经过审查；发送贡献不赋予署名权或编辑权，赞助也绝不能换取研究结论。
法律文件。
本网站上的地图、数据和图表仅作为背景和一般信息展示。它们不是建议、预测或预警；信息的局限见免责声明和数据说明。