Louis-Pierre Bergé
email: louis-pierre.berge@irit.fr

Emmanuel Dubois
email: emmanuel.dubois@irit.fr

Mathieu Raynal
email: mathieu.raynal@irit.fr

Design and Evaluation of an "Around the SmartPhone" Technique for 3D Manipulations on Distant Display

Keywords: 3D interaction, manipulation task, around-device interaction

In this paper, we present the "Around the SmartPhone" interaction technique for manipulating 3D elements displayed on a distant screen. The design of the technique is based on the selection of the most appropriate value for characteristics useful to discriminate existing tactile and tangible techniques for 3D manipulations. We perform two user studies to compare this around-device technique for translating and rotating 3D objects, with two existing tangible and tactile solutions, in terms of performance and user's preference. The literature establishes that the tactile technique evaluated is the best tactile technique among the existing tactile techniques for 3D manipulation. Despite this result, our user study reveals that the two others perform significantly better. In addition, when feedback visibility is preserved, the around-device technique offers similar performance results than the tangible one. Finally, the around-device technique is significantly preferred over the two others in every condition.

INTRODUCTION

Using 3D content in interactive environment is becoming more and more frequent. 3D interactive virtual environments (3DVE) tend to get out of the sole hands of 3D experts using dedicated devices [START_REF] Gomes De Sá | Virtual reality as a tool for verification of assembly and maintenance processes[END_REF]. Indeed 3DVE can now be found in many private activities such as on web sites to assist house furniture selection [START_REF] Lee | 3D interaction using mobile device on 3D environments with large screen[END_REF], in daily mobile contexts [START_REF] Magliocchetti | I-MOVE: towards the use of a mobile 3D GeoBrowser framework for urban mobility decision making[END_REF] and to play public 3D games [START_REF] Vajk | Using a Mobile Phone as a "Wii-like" Controller for Playing Games on a Large Public Display[END_REF]; in professional contexts to visualize scientific 3D data [START_REF] Song | WYSIWYF:exploring and annotating volume data with a tangible handheld device[END_REF], to explore 3D data during meetings [START_REF] Jeon | Interaction with large ubiquitous displays using cameraequipped mobile phones[END_REF] or to create and edit 3D model [START_REF] De Araùjo | Mockup builder: direct 3D modeling on and above the surface in a continuous interaction space[END_REF]; and even in museums [START_REF] Marton | IsoCam: Interactive Visual Exploration of Massive Cultural Heritage Models on Large Projection Setups[END_REF].

Using a smartphone for supporting the interaction with 3DVE in such everyday life situations presents many potential benefits: providing a multi-sensor remote interaction control thus avoiding occlusion; exploiting a personal and familiar device; displaying additional feedback on the smartphone screen. The use of smartphone to interact with 3D content on distant display has already been considered for example to manipulate a slice plane [START_REF] Song | WYSIWYF:exploring and annotating volume data with a tangible handheld device[END_REF], to navigate, select or manipulate a 3D object [START_REF] Bergé | Exploring smartphone-based interaction with overview+detail interfaces on 3D public displays[END_REF][START_REF] Kratz | PalmSpace: continuous around-device gestures vs. multitouch for 3D rotation tasks on mobile devices[END_REF][START_REF] Lee | 3D interaction using mobile device on 3D environments with large screen[END_REF]. Combinations of finger movements [START_REF] Telkenaroglu | Dual-Finger 3D Interaction Techniques for mobile devices[END_REF], device orientations [START_REF] Lee | 3D interaction using mobile device on 3D environments with large screen[END_REF] and gesture around the device [START_REF] Kratz | PalmSpace: continuous around-device gestures vs. multitouch for 3D rotation tasks on mobile devices[END_REF] represent many alternatives for implementing smartphone-based techniques for 3D interaction. Among these works, less attention has been paid to the combined use of around-device techniques, based on a smartphone, with a 3D scene displayed on a distant screen. And yet, "around the smartphone" interaction techniques have already been successfully explored in other settings [START_REF] Jones | Around device interaction for multiscale navigation[END_REF][START_REF] Ketabdar | MagiWrite: Towards Touchless Digit Entry Using 3D Space Around Mobile Devices[END_REF]. The goal of our work is thus to design, implement and evaluate a new interaction technique involving gestures around a smartphone to manipulate a 3D object displayed on a distant screen.

We first review existing smartphone-based interaction techniques with 3D environments displayed on the smartphone and on distant screens. Secondly, we describe a tangible and a tactile smartphone-based interaction technique to manipulate 3D objects: each one is representative of one of these two classes of existing interaction techniques based on a smartphone in such 3D task. We then describe four characteristics related to the specificities of the context and through which exiting tactile and tangible techniques can be analyzed and discriminated. Based on these characteristics, we design a new technique, "Around the SmartPhone" (ASP), which involves hand gestures around the smartphone to manipulate 3D elements displayed on a distant screen. A first user study with training session and a complementary user study ensuring a more realistic use of the smartphone, compare the three techniques in terms of performance, usability and user's preference. Results reveal that our around-device technique (ASP) performs far better than the tactile solution (OSP). Moreover, ASP technique offers equivalent performance than the tangible solution (WSP). In addition, ASP is largely identified as the preferred technique among the three considered.

RELATED WORK

Many interaction techniques exist in virtual reality (VR) to support 3D manipulations (i.e. 3D elements translations and rotations), such as World-in-Miniature, Virtual Hand or Go-Go techniques [START_REF] Bowman | 3D User Interfaces: Theory and Practice[END_REF]. More advanced forms of interaction include tangible interfaces such as the Hinckley's puppet [START_REF] Hinckley | Passive real-world interface props for neurosurgical visualization[END_REF] and the Cubic Mouse [START_REF] Frohlich | Cubic-Mouse-based interaction in virtual environments[END_REF]. In this section, we specifically focus on other advanced interaction techniques in which smartphones have been involved to manipulate 3D objects.

Given the growing computing capabilities of smartphones, 3D content can easily be displayed and interacted with, on a smartphone. A first trend for supporting 3D manipulations consists in using the direct touch modality, i.e. the tactile screen [START_REF] Jankowski | Advances in Interaction with 3D Environments[END_REF]. Based on an adaptation of multi-touch and direct interaction on tabletop, different techniques have been proposed such as the Z-technique [START_REF] Martinet | The design and evaluation of 3D positioning techniques for multi-touch displays[END_REF], useful to translate an object and the Arc-Ball [START_REF]OpenGL Programming/Modern OpenGL Tutorial Arcball[END_REF] technique useful to rotate an object. Both have been A third set of res and has therefore as a novel appro mid-air gesture t smartphone scree and animation ar on a tablet surfa support the navi more prospectiv endering around 3D interactive pr n the works prev smartphone scre 3D content has a screen: the smar content. In such single touch in distantly displaye made use of the nteraction and sm with a virtual han a smartphone fo nvestigated [START_REF] Katzakis | Mobile devices as multi-DOF controllers[END_REF] as a tool palette as a carrier arte displays, tabletop To summarize, w solutions have b nteraction with solutions have b on a smartphone yet, around-devic asks in which m simultaneously [2 Our goal is thus n the existing w device interacti manipulating 3D well-known 3D manipulation tas definitely require

CHARA DISCRIMIN TANGIBLE

We first present epresentative o smartphone-base screen. "With th n smartphone [3 e to manipulate 3 of widgets for c ped [START_REF] Cohé | tBox: a 3d transformation widget designed for touch-screens[END_REF] or adapt related to touch of Degrees Of 3D manipulatio han one or two si martphones also to design new fo e considered as ined with the us 3D object [START_REF] Daiber | Designing gestures for mobile 3D gaming[END_REF][START_REF] Liang | User-defined surface+motion gestures for 3d manipulation of objects at a distance through a mobile device[END_REF] searches aims to e investigated ar oach to interact echnique for rot en [START_REF] Kratz | PalmSpace: continuous around-device gestures vs. multitouch for 3D rotation tasks on mobile devices[END_REF]. In T(eth re supported thr ace. Mid-air ges gation and the s vely the combin d a smartphone h rojection [START_REF] Serrano | Identifying suitable projection parameters and display configurations for mobile true-3D displays[END_REF]. viously mention en. But using a also been conside rtphone become settings the sma nteraction whil ed cultural herit e smartphone to martphone move nd [START_REF] Katzakis | INSPECT: Extending Plane-Casting for 6-DOF Control[END_REF][START_REF] Lee | 3D interaction using mobile device on 3D environments with large screen[END_REF]

CS ACTILE AN CTION TEC

tion of two inter and tangible r manipulating 3 (WSP) is a ta ared to the Dua rect manipulatio manipulation hav g widget [START_REF] Kratz | PalmSpace: continuous around-device gestures vs. multitouch for 3D rotation tasks on mobile devices[END_REF]. On on with 3D is th OF) increases th touch techniqu niques [START_REF] Hancock | Shallow-Depth 3D Interaction: Design and Evaluation of One-, Two-and Three-Touch Techniques[END_REF].

tiple sensors th on: these forms ces. Orientation creen can be use size of the scree eraction techniqu nt. PalmSpace is s displayed on th user 3D modelin above, behind an been explored objects [START_REF] Bergé | Exploring smartphone-based interaction with overview+detail interfaces on 3D public displays[END_REF]. Eve ir interaction an ed to create a tru s displayed on th or interacting wi tion with a dista ntroller of the 3 en used to suppo and manipulatin [START_REF] Marton | IsoCam: Interactive Visual Exploration of Massive Cultural Heritage Models on Large Projection Setups[END_REF]. Other wor bination of tacti rolling a 3D obje n. Tangible use nt has also bee ed the smartphon dical data [START_REF] Song | WYSIWYF:exploring and annotating volume data with a tangible handheld device[END_REF], t between sever meetings [START_REF] Jeon | Interaction with large ubiquitous displays using cameraequipped mobile phones[END_REF].

and around-devi to support user tile and tangib interaction base istant screen. An d as promising f must be controlle and fill the gap le oping an aroun smartphone, f creen. Among th is paper on th ore complex as

ND CHNIQUES

G THE IMP AND OSP

ues, common to to finalize the i e not specific to manipulate 3D the final implem hing. In the thre ons and 3D rot (cf. section on D echanism is thu yed on the sma ).

action with (W does not provid ore be considere preferable [START_REF] Zhai | Human Performance in Six Degree of Freedom Input Control[END_REF].

- be accelerated. Regarding ASP, using a constant C/D gain simplifies the use of the technique and limits the learning difficulties. A one to one C/D gain for ASP and WSP is thus used. Now regarding OSP, adopting a constant C/D gain is conform to the initial implementation of the technique [START_REF] Telkenaroglu | Dual-Finger 3D Interaction Techniques for mobile devices[END_REF]: to fit with the 3D environment used in our user study, the adopted C/D gain resulted from a preliminary study allowing the users to adjust the C/D gain to allow a comfortable use of the technique.

Gesture mapping and clutching mechanism. Kratz [21] defined four different mappings of hand gestures onto the orientation of a virtual object, that are also applicable to the translation task: absolute control, scaled absolute control, relative control and rate control. The three techniques considered adopt a relative control. This is again in line with the implementation of OSP provided by the authors. Regarding WSP and ASP a relative control induces the presence of clutching and provides more fluidity in the manipulation: whatever the initial position and orientations of the manipulated object, it can be further translated or rotated without having to reposition the dominant hand in the previously reached configuration. Visual aids. Many works explored visual aids for guiding and helping the user during the interaction process [START_REF] Bowman | 3D User Interfaces: Theory and Practice[END_REF]. The three interaction techniques includes visual aids to ease the perception of the 3D scene frame of reference: the axes of the 3D scene frame of reference are represented on the 3D manipulated object, thus reproducing the feedback provided in modeler software like Maya when manipulating an object. Additional aids are also provided to guide the use of the techniques, i.e. to help performing the appropriate user's input movements. For the OSP technique, fingers contact are displayed on the smartphone to visualize if they are considered joint or apart as originally designed in the Dual-Finger technique [START_REF] Telkenaroglu | Dual-Finger 3D Interaction Techniques for mobile devices[END_REF]. When performing rotations with ASP, a representation of the user's hand position around the smartphone is displayed as a black sphere around the manipulated object in the 3D scene. This is intended to help the user in virtually grabbing one specific vertex of the 3D manipulated object (Figure 4-center). In addition, a wireframe sphere is displayed around the 3D manipulated object: (Figure 4-center).

The goal is double: to encourage the user in performing hand movements close to the smartphone and therefore better feel that the smartphone is the center of the rotations; to give the impression that when the hand is moving around the smartphone, it is also stroking the digital wireframe sphere and thus rotating the 3D object included in the sphere.

Hardware and software tracking solutions. To support the user experiment, we built a proof-of-concept prototype for WSP and ASP based on the use of an extra tool to localize the smartphone and the user's hand in 6D, as described in section 6.3. The discussion (section 9) mentions alternate embedded solutions. For the WSP technique, the position and the orientation of the smartphone are captured by the tracking system. We used quaternion representation of the orientation of the smartphone in order to implement a relative control of the rotation movement.

For the translation of the ASP technique, the position of the user dominant-hand (H SP ) is measured with regards to the smartphone position and orientation. Regarding the rotation performed with ASP, converting the position of H SP into an orientation is a technical issue specific to this technique. Our solution relies on the use of axis-angle representation and Rodrigues formula. At each frame, we compute the 3D rotation matrix required to transform the previous H SP into the current H SP .

USER STUDY

The study includes two distinct sessions: the first (resp. second) session consisted in applying 3D translations (resp. rotations) to a 3D object. For these two sessions, the goal of this study is to evaluate and compare the performance, usability and user preference of the three techniques introduced in the previous section. We hypothesize that the around-device technique (ASP) will be more efficient than OSP and WSP because hand gestures are easier to perform, control and understand. ASP will also be preferred over the two others because it is more comfortable to use given the possibility to freely adjust the position and orientations of the smartphone.

Task and Mapping

For the two sessions, participants were instructed to perform the task as quickly and accurately as possible. For the three interactions techniques, participants start and validate each trial by pressing the same button displayed on the smartphone screen.

During the 3D translation task, we asked participants to reach a 3D spherical target in a 3D environment by translating a small 3D spherical cursor (Figure 4-left). The spherical target is always displayed in the center of a 3D cube delimiting the 3D environment. A representation of the axes is attached to the spherical cursor. In addition, stars representing the center of the spherical cursor are projected on two planes of the 3D scene contour. These visual aids are displayed in blue. The same visual aids related to the target sphere are displayed in red. These visual aids provide the user with a support to accurately move and position the object.

The initial position of the spherical cursor is situated in one of the 8 different directions (combining equal x, y and z translations) at two different distances (12.99 and 8.66 units) from the spherical target. The spherical cursor has a fixed radius of 0.5 units. We implemented two different spherical target radiuses (0.5 and 1.7 units) to produce 4 Index of Difficulties (2.6, 3.11, 4.19 and 4.75 bits). The participant can validate the 3D translation task when the cursor collides with the spherical target.

During the 3D rotation task, we asked participants to rotate a tetrahedral cursor until it fits the orientation of the tetrahedral target (Figure 4-center). The two tetrahedral centers are always located in the center of the 3D environment. Spheres of different colors are attached to the vertices of the tetrahedral form. The tetrahedral target is always displayed in green with a fixed orientation. In contrast, the tetrahedral cursor is displayed in brown. These visual aids provide the participant with indications to correctly interpret the current and targeted orientations of the 3D objects.

The initial orientation of the tetrahedral cursor is a combination of rotation axes (XY, XZ, YX, and XYZ) with one of the two angle values (50° and 100°), giving a total of 8 different starting orientations. The participant can validate the 3D orientation task when all the colored spheres of the tetrahedral cursor collide with the corresponding colored spheres of the tetrahedral target.

Particip

We recruited 12 SD=6.9). None Nine had used ge Our setting is co motion capture f Figure 5).

COMPL ENHANCIN

The [START_REF] Parsons | Inability to reason about an object's orientation using an axis and angle of rotation[END_REF]. Although the input frames of reference of WSP and ASP are respectively world reference and the smartphone, we did not observe in these studies significant difference between the users' performance with WSP and ASP. We believe that the design of ASP provides an original and appropriate solution to cope with such frame of reference mismatch issues because the smartphone can be seen as a physical landmark. This landmark contributes to overcome the arbitrary relationship between the two frames of reference because it reifies the coordinate system in which gestures has to be performed to move an object in 6DOF. This hypothesis is in line with previous work related to bimanual interaction [START_REF] Guiard | Asymmetric division of labor in human skilled bimanual action: the kinematic chain as a model[END_REF]. Future works are required to precisely establish under which conditions an arounddevice technique provides a better support for interacting with a distantly rendered 3D scene, and especially for situations involving predefined and high mismatches of frames of reference, similar to those involved in Ware's experiment [START_REF] Ware | Frames of reference in virtual object rotation[END_REF].

DOF combination and input space were more limited in OSP than in ASP and WSP. We believe that this is partly responsible for the low OSP performance results. The visibility of the feedback provided by the smartphone was not concretely evaluated in our study, since no dynamic information relevant to the task was provided to users. However, the complementary user study clearly established the effect of this characteristic on the performances.

Finally, one limitation of our study is the detection mechanisms of the hand and smartphone motions in the WSP and ASP techniques: the technology used in this study is external to the smartphone and will very unlikely be available in many places. But, this solution was used to ensure robust and accurate measures to support the evaluation of the technique. Thinking in terms of a proof-of-Concept version of the technique might however rely on many existing solutions: proximity sensors on some Samsung devices already allow page browsing based on hand-motions detection; camera resolution are always increasing on current smartphone; small depth camera sensor [START_REF] Kratz | PalmSpace: continuous around-device gestures vs. multitouch for 3D rotation tasks on mobile devices[END_REF] also constitute an alternative.

Social acceptability issue is a second limitation of around-device techniques. Would a user accept to move his/her hand around the smartphone to interact with a distant display in an office or public context? Recent works started to explore this acceptability question [START_REF] Serrano | Exploring the use of hand-to-face input for interacting with head-worn displays[END_REF] and we will explore it through in-situ evaluation.

CONCLUSION AND FUTURE WORK

In this paper, we presented the first around-device interaction technique ("Around the SmartPhone" -ASP), based on a smartphone and used to manipulate 3D elements displayed on a distant screen. The design was guided by reasoning on four characteristics discriminating existing smartphone-based tactile and tangible interaction techniques with 3DVE.

To evaluate this new interaction technique, we performed two controlled user studies to compare ASP to a tangible ("With the SmartPhone" -WSP) and a tactile ("On the SmartPhone" -OSP) smartphone-based techniques taken from the literature. These evaluations reveal that WSP and ASP perform better than OSP in 3D translation and rotation. WSP and ASP perform similarly in 3D translation. They also perform similarly in 3D rotation when eye-access to the smartphone-screen is maintained all along the task. Otherwise, WSP is significantly faster that ASP but does no longer support an access to additional feedback provided on the smartphone screen.

From a qualitative point of view, ASP is the most attractive and preferred technique. It also minimizes the risk of dropping the smartphone and physically materializes the input frame of reference. This work confirms that an "around the smartphone" interaction technique to control distant 3D is a very good alternative to tactile and tangible solutions: this is in line with results observed when interacting with 3D scenes directly displayed on the smartphone. We also revealed the need to further explore the impact of the smartphone, considered as a physical handled landmark, on the user's ability to cope with mismatch between input and 3D scene frames of reference. In the future, we plan to integrate ASP and WSP techniques in a concrete public scenario in order to observe limitations inherent to an in-situ context and to explore further optimizations of ASP and WSP, such as in [START_REF] Appert | OrthoZoom scroller: 1D multi-scale navigation[END_REF][START_REF] Tsandilas | Modeless pointing with low-precision wrist movements[END_REF], in order to reduce the need for clutching.

Figure 4 .

 4 Figure 4. Visual aids in the 3D scene for the translation (left) and rotation task (center and right).

ure 1. WSP beha lored arrows: in ows: input (thin

	al-	with th he mobile device e itself, and is s
	ns	[10, 14 4]; "On the Smar rtPhone" (OSP)
	ve	require es finger gestures s to be performe
	ne	in Dua alFinger [39]. T They both con
	hat	existing g interaction t techniques for
	he	corresp ponds to a very c common tangibl
	ues	also v validated for i its usability [
		implem mentation of the	Dual-Finger tec
	hat of	origina al code, it has be een established offers b better performan nce than other tac
	of	To ana alyze and compa are these two se
	ed	we iden ntified four disc criminating chara
		to desi ign questions th hat should be r
	en ue s a ng he	techniq ques for manipul lating 3D on a di referen nce; DOF comb bination abilitie availab ble space in inpu ut. We describe t OSP (ta actile). of each h characteristic, and illustrate th
	nd to nd en	3.1 A A Tangible Tech niques Imple ementation	(WSP) and s of Existing
	ue-	The tan ngible techniqu ue is the "With
		techniq que. The behav vior of this tec
	he ith ant 3D ort ng rks ile ect of en ne or	similar in 3D measur red in a coordin to the one desc cribed in [14] to medical data. T Translation offs nate system def and dir rectly mapped to o the manipulate Similar rly, any rotation ns of the smartph rotation ns applied to the e selected 3D o the sma artphone in a pla ane parallel to th of the 3D object aroun nd its vertical a approac ches have been n very frequently settings s with various s physical prop smartph hone that embed ds a display and tangible e interfaces hav ve been proven t newcom mers and occasio onal users [37].
	ral
	ce
	r's
	ble
	ed
	nd
	for
	ed
	eft	Figu
	nd-	Col
	for	arro
	he	The ta actile technique
	he	techniq que (Figure 2): i
	it	techniq que [39]. To pe
		moved	jointly up and
		object m moves along the
		are mo oved apart, the p
		mapped d to the (X, Z) p
	raction technique sets of existin 3DVE on a dista angible interactio S es, ng ant on	virtual "When directio environment. T the user moves on, the object is The sam me applies to m same d direction to ro

avior (translati nput and 3D ob n) and 3D (dash

	similar to tangib
	is a tactile techn
	ed on the smartp
	nstitute a refere
	3D manipula
	le situation, well
	14, 37]; OSP
	chnique based on
	that OSP, like t
	ctile application
	ets of interaction
	acteristics. They
	raised to design
	istant screen: inp
	s; feedback vis
	the role and pos
	hem on WSP (ta
	Tactile (OS
	g 3D Manip
	the SmartPho
	hnique (Figure
	o manipulate a c
	sets of the sma
	fined by the dis
	ed elements of th
	hone are directly
	object. For exam
	he ground, trigge
	axis (Y axis). Su
	y adopted in vi
	ps. Here the p
	d other sensors.
	to be easy
	e is the "On
	it is an impleme
	erform a translat
	down on the s
	e Y axis of the 3
	plane defined by
	plane of the 3D
	To perform a ro
	both fingers pa
	correspondingly
	moving the finge
	tate the object

to ap ion, rotation) an bject movement hed) frame of re the SmartPho

	ble interface
	nique which
	phone just as
	ence among
	ation: WSP
	l known and
	being an
	n its authors
	the original,
	ns [39].
	n techniques
	y correspond
	n interaction
	put frame of
	sibility; and
	ssible values
	angible) and
	SP)
	pulation
	one" (WSP)
	1) is very
	cutting plane
	artphone are
	stant display
	he 3D scene.
	y mapped to
	mple rotating
	ers rotations
	uch tangible
	irtual reality
	prop is the
	In addition,
	pprehend by
	entation of the
	tion, if the two
	screen, the 3D m
	3D scene. If the
	y the smartphon
	scene, i.e. the gr
	otation task, we
	arallel to X axis
	y rotated around
	ers parallel to Y
	t around X axi

nd in use. ts. Black eference.

	a around Z axis is
	fi fingers parallel t
	w was established
	c comparison to ot
	th he Z-technique [
	3
	W
	to
	li
	A
	s
	e
	r
	tr
	e
	p
	fr
	fr
	a
	of
	o
	R
	a
	v
	d
	o
	T
	w
	s
	[
	c
	a
	e
	o
	c
	d
	th
	th fr	one" (OSP) Dual-Finger
	R	fingers are
	d	manipulated
	r	two fingers
	a	ne display is
	w	round of the
	R	quote [39]:
	d	in the same
	s	d the Y axis.
	s	Y axis in the
	m	is. Rotation

Figure 2. OSP Arrow 3.2 Four di

	s performed by
	to X axis or Y a
	that Dual-Finge
	ther well-known
	[27] and the Arc
	We here describe
	o analyze and
	iterature may pla
	A well-known d
	system accordin
	elements of the
	epresents the fr
	ranslations to re
	egocentric fram
	perspective: it is
	frame of referenc
	frame refers to u
	an absolute refer
	of reference, or in
	of an object: it is
	Regarding WSP
	adopted is the w
	virtual reality
	discriminating ch
	one: the input fra
	The input frame
	which user's inpu
	scene. Poupyrev
	34] for man
	consideration. Th
	and the Control
	emphasizes the n
	of reference bu
	controls are ini
	definition by intr
	he input device
	he importance o
	frame of referenc
	Regarding WSP
	display and to it
	ight of the 3D s
	and for the rotati
	with the 3D sce
	Regarding OSP,
	display moves th
	scene. The input
	smartphone disp
	metaphoric map

P behavior (tra ws: same conve iscriminatin

	a twisting actio
	axis, in the oppo
	er has better per
	n tactile interacti
	c-Ball [32]
	e and illustrate f
	compare WSP
	ay a role in the u
	design question i
	ng to which tra
	3D scene. Th
	rame of referenc
	endered element
	me of referenc
	s centered at the
	ce (usually called
	unchanging envi
	rence, fixed in th
	ntrinsic frame, r
	attached to the
	P and OSP, the
	world reference,
	settings. Ther
	haracteristics bu
	ame of reference
	e of reference d
	uts are performe
	notions of exoc
	nipulation tech
	hrough the com
	l-Display congr
	need for conside
	t also the fram
	itiated. Ware
	roducing the ha
	used by the use
	of adopting a coh
	ce and haptic fra
	, moving the sm
	ts right moves th
	scene. Same beh
	ions. The input f
	ene frame of ref
	sliding the fing
	he manipulated
	t frame of refer
	play. As this
	pping defines a

techn nslation, rotatio entions than Fig ng character

	on by moving th he ne and mid-air n the smartphon s displayed on is r gesture can b be	(rotatio ons of two fing gers) and an ar rbitrary mappin g defines a DOF c
	c continuously pro oduced all around d the device.	osite direction".	It	referen nce for the third translat	translation (join nt fingers instea ad of fingers
	rformance [39] ion technique, e. nique. in .g. ASP was propo que similar to A Another techniq A s li o r [ a selection task p imited to transla of feedback to b estricting it to a 5] and ASP also erformed in a ations of a single be displayed on a detailed portion o differ in terms 3D scene. ASP e plane and allow n the smartphon n of the 3D scen s of control (resp osed in [5] for P however is n ws different form ne screen witho ne. Mid-Air Han pectively absolu a not ms out nd ute and relative).	apart). DOF c synthes quicker simulta perform separat affects combination ab sized in [28] usin r than using aneous use of al mance in virtual ting translation performance [26 bility has an imp ng real object to traditional mo l the DOF does reality settings. and rotation s 6]. pact on 3D digit o manipulate 3D ouse and key not always lead It was also esta significantly and tal tasks. As D elements is yboard, but d to the best ablished that d positively Further perform We the and rot we cho perform techniq capabil
	four discriminati and OSP that usability of the te in 3D is related ansformations w he 3D scene fra ce adopted to ap ts of a 3D envir ce corresponds e user's head. T d the world refer ironmental settin on) and in use. gure 1. ristics ing characteristi according to th echniques. to the coordina will be applied ame of referen pply rotations an ics he ate to sic on haracteristics in discriminating ch d ntroduced and ill lustrated on WS SP T To further refine e the design of f ASP, we now refer to the fo our ed la arger mid-air ge sture amplitude. . r's h hand and arm m movements arou und the smartph hone thus offerin ng he te echnique involv es writ moveme ents while ASP t echnique involv ves nd tr raditional on-s creen interactio on technique. However, WS SP ce Figure 3. ASP Arrow P behavior (tran ws: same conve nslation, rotatio entions than Fig on) and in use. gure 1. th he use of mid d-air gestures w while the OSP P technique is a a above, our ASP technique and the WSP techni ique are based o on In n comparison to o the tactile an nd tangible techn niques introduce ed	Regard Feedba ding OSP, the tr ack visibility is o raditional finger only partially ma r occlusion issu aintained. ue is raised. the use er, the display is no longer readable or ev ven visible. under c certain combinat tions of rotation ns of the devices s handed by if the s smartphone is t translated too fa ar away from th he user and Regard ding WSP, the fe eedback visibilit ty is not always maintained: Regard separat present simulta translat rately a Feedba in such smartph feedbac feedbac object, scene, e the sma ding WSP and O ted: it is impossi t setting. WSP aneously during tion along the Y and rotation can ack visibility is h settings inst hone screen can ck: a 3D detail ck about the ac annotations or etc. In those cas artphone screen OSP, rotations ible to perform allows the th g translations Y axis (joint fing be performed al one huge benefi tead of physica n provide the u l of the distant ccurate position real pictures o ses it is importan since it may affe and translations them simultane hree axes to be or rotations. gers) can only be long one axis on it of involving a al props as in user with differe scene as in [5 and orientation f different parts nt to maintain ey fect the user's tas Feedba s are totally around eously in the constru e controlled domina With OSP, Howev e used sepa-Among nly at a time. feedbac smartphone Availab n [14]. The the ava ent forms of 5], a textual n of the 3D space i movem user's m s of the 3D sk. ye-access to the sma
	he environment. nstantiate them and OSP, and i a in a suitable m manner to fit th me he	Availab ble space in in nput varies amon ng smartphones s and tablets
	refers to the top, etting (cf. Table around-device se a 1).	ght	sizes, b but comes with h a higher we eight and delica ateness, not
	3D object manip e 3D scene fra i.e. the most u efore, it is n ut it is tightly l ame of referen usual one used not one of th linked to the fir zing the fou 4.2 Optimiz 4 ur discrimin nating ce in he c characterist tics I Input frame of reference: ASP P being used in front of a dista ant s screen, the user m may be not perf fectly facing the screen. Therefo ore rst a adopting the wor rld reference as input frame mi ght be disturbin ng: e. denotes the fram ed to manipulate centric and egoc hniques slightl bination of the D uence axis [31] ering not only th me of reference [42] provided aptic frame of re er is manipulate herent combinat ame of reference martphone paral he manipulated havior applies alo frame of referen ference, i.e. the me of reference e elements of a 3 centric metapho y express th Display centrici ], Milgram bett he 3D scene fram e in which user an even clear eference in whic ed. He also show tion of a 3D scen . llel to the dista 3D objects to th ong the other ax nce is then aligne e world referenc if f the user looks at the screen w with an angle of f 45 degrees, han nd in m motions would still have to b be performed p perpendicularly or 3D p parallel to the dis stant screen! ors his ity T The goal of AS SP is to offer a a solution suppo orting the lack of a alignment betwe een the devices used to render the 3D scene an nd p produce the inpu ut controls, i.e. to o support the us se of two differe ent ter fr frames of refere nce for the 3D scene (world r reference) and th he me in nput (smartpho one reference). Therefore, the input frame of r's r eference of ASP P must be attach hed to the smart tphone as in OS SP. rer H However unlike OSP, it is a tru ue 3DOF input f frame of referen ce ch ws ne ant n not limited to t the smartphone e-display axes: the third axis is p perpendicular to the smartphone screen. It adds a benefit: the us ser c can adjust the po osition and orien ntation of the no on-dominant han nd h handling the sm martphone in or rder to allow m more comfortab ble m movements of th he dominant hand d around the sma artphone. he A As a result, for t the translation t ask (Figure 3), translation offse ets xis ce. s smartphone orien ntation and appli ied to the 3D obj ject. ed o of the dominant t hand are thus s computed wit th regards to th he	compat exploiti tible with public ing the space al c spaces and mo ll-around the de obile devices. A evices extends th Alternatively he available space vocabu signific in input and ulary on smartph cantly affect the for example hone [20]. Avai efficiently sup ilable input spa pports input ace can thus usability. Regard ding WSP, the av vailable space is s almost unlimit ted. It is just constra ained by wrist m movement (rotat tion) and by the e size of the user's a arm (translation) ). Regarding OSP P, the space is li imited to the size of the smartphone screen. 4. DE SMA ESIGNING ARTPHONE G THE "AR E" TECHNI ROUND THE E IQUE In this s section, we present the de esign of the "A Around the SmartP Phone" (ASP) te echnique, an arou und-device tech hnique based on a sm martphone and d dedicated to the manipulation of f a 3D scene rendere ed on a distant di display. 4.1 A ASP is elemen handles hand g ASP in Brie s a smartphone nts displayed on s the smartphon gestures, with th ef e based techniqu a distant screen. ne in the non-do he dominant han ue used to man . With ASP the u ominant hand an nd, around the s nipulate 3D user steadily nd performs smartphone. Transla ating (resp. ro otating) the do ominant-hand around the manipu ulated object. smartph hone controls th he translation (r resp. orientation n) of the 3D
	ger to the right o 3D object to th rence is therefor display defines of the smartphon he right of the 3 re attached to th s only 2DOF, ne task (Figure 3), the smartphone e (resp. its cente er) 3D axes (resp. the e origin) of th e input frame of he hen applied to th F For the rotation m materializes the th he 3D object. a r eference around d which hand ro otation offsets a are measured an nd	Unlike smartph hone are not lim PalmSpace [ [21] user's ha and gestures mited to the cont trol of rotations. our AS SP technique is n not dedicated to situation in whic around the In addition, ch 3D scene
	reference for t the third rotatio on

ronment

[START_REF] Ware | Frames of reference in virtual object rotation[END_REF]

. Th s to a viewer The room-centere rence) or extrins ngs: it is based o The object fram bottom, left, rig pulated.

Table 5 . FI OF A

 5

	Additio
	have be
	techniq
	interact
	screen b
	3D task
	include
	perform
	A mod
	press a
	(transla
	Contro
	(ASP) t
	techniq
	control
	C/D g
	conside
	exist: t
	mathem
	Typical
	accurac
	constan
	manipu

ting characteris ay = value is dif

stics applied to A fferent from AS PLEMENTA

		ously mentioned d, separating
		to better p performance.
		ion and rotati	on can be
		m them indepen ndently [30].
	nique to keep the e translation
		OSP techniques.	In addition,
		on of the three	axes when
		): this is similar	to the WSP
		e of the spatial l interaction
		ice setting.
		ies on gestures s performed
		dback visibility y will by
		ry limited situ uations, the
		e screen from the e user's-eye.
		vercome these	limitations.
		es, ASP support	s the largest
		gning ASP, it ap ppeared that
		different from t the available
		onstraining the	translations
		hnique is constra ained by the
		inant hand and	arm around
		ASP, WSP
		SP)
		ATION
	o any interaction n technique,
		implementation	of the three
		to a smartph hone based
		DVE displayed	on a distant
	mentation of the	techniques.
		ee techniques, m manipulation
		tations which c can only be
		DOF combinatio on abilities).
	us integrated: the e user must
		artphone, during g the action
		SP), on (OSP), , or around
		e any force feed dback. These
		ed as isotonic a and position
	Display gain	is a recurr rent design
	community [7 7]. Two major	approaches
	e constant or co omputed on the e basis of a
	n applied to	movement cha aracteristics.
	ration raises a tr rade-off between n speed and
	echniques consid dered in this pa aper adopt a
	Regarding WS SP, tangible U UI physical
	ctly applied to t the digital world d and cannot

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank Gary Perelman for his help during the implementation of the 3D environment of this work and all the participants who generously shared their time for the study. We are also grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the paper.


Centre de Recherche de l'Ecole des Officiers de la Gendarmerie Nationale Les objets connectés s'installent progressivement dans notre vie courante. Au nombre de 4 milliards actuellement, ils seront, selon certaines estimations, 50 milliards en 2020. Leur utilisation croissante dans la vie courante des individus aura des implications en matière de sécurité et de confidentialité des données échangées.

Objets connectés : expansion et menaces

Aujourd'hui, le grand public plébiscite les objets connectés dès lors qu'ils participent à des activités de loisir. Le « fun » est la motivation première des acheteurs d'objets high tech. La sécurité devient cependant un élément différenciant pour le consommateur. Cette dimension est désormais prise en compte par les concepteurs d'éléments électroniques qui, à l'instar de Intel, s'efforcent de l'intégrer dès le stade de la conception.

Cinq risques liés à la sécurité peuvent être identifiés. Le premier risque est économique. En effet, tout objet dont la sécurité prête à caution perd instantanément la confiance du public et, par la même occasion, ne se vend plus. Le second risque est un risque médical. Les appareils de santé connectés peuvent être la cible d'attaques malveillantes ou de bugs provoqués par des informations erronées reçues. Les appareils concernés peuvent alors mettre en péril la santé de leurs utilisateurs, voire même leur vie (par exemple s'agissant de stimulateurs cardiaques ou de pompes à insuline). Les données personnelles constituent la cible du troisième risque puisqu'un très grand nombre d'informations portant sur les activités des individus circuleront de facto sur les réseaux, les objets ne sollicitant pas forcément l'accord de leur propriétaire pour communiquer entre eux. Pourront ainsi être interceptées et exploitées des informations relatives aux déplacements, aux habitudes de consommation, à la santé... Le quatrième risque est celui des logiciels malveillants. Il se trouve amplifié car beaucoup d'objets utiliseront ou communiqueront avec un OS1 embarqué et se trouveront exposés aux attaques de hackers. Enfin, le dernier risque est lié aux utilisateurs. Actuellement sous-éduqués sur les questions de sécurité informatique, ils ont des habitudes qui mettent en péril leur sécurité informatique, donc l'intégrité de leurs données personnelles.

Tous ces risques peuvent se concrétiser de manières diverses. Un logiciel espion, introduit dans le système d'exploitation d'une paire de lunettes connectée, peut permettre à un tiers d'accéder aux images capturées par celles-ci. Les télévisions connectées sont susceptibles d'être l'objet du même type de piratage (de manière discrète si le pirate prend soin d'éteindre le témoin de fonctionnement...). Les objets connectés pourront également recevoir des spams, comme nos boîtes mail actuelles. Les possibilités sont déclinables à l'infini.

Les menaces sont d'autant plus prégnantes que, dès à présent, il est possible de trouver facilement par un moteur de recherche les objets connectés 2 . Sont ainsi accessibles des caméras de surveillance mais aussi des systèmes aussi divers que des centres de crémation ou des installations électriques. Compte tenu de ces éléments, la société Mc Affee, propriété d'Intel, estime avoir quatre défis à relever. Le premier consiste à intégrer dès la conception des éléments de sécurité dans les composants produits par Intel. L'objectif est de sortir des lignes de fabrication des composants proposant d'emblée un haut niveau de sécurité. Le deuxième défi consiste à intervenir sur le partage d'informations. Il s'agit de donner aux objets une capacité à filtrer les demandes d'accès de manière à limiter les risques de piratage. Le troisième challenge est celui de la standardisation destinée à permettre à l'ensemble des objets connectés de se transmettre des informations de sécurité. Il s'agit de réagir le plus vite possible aux attaques identifiées avant qu'elles ne se propagent. Dans l'idéal, l'alerte doit se répandre plus vite que la menace. Enfin, le dernier défi est celui de l'éducation des consommateurs. Les comportements à risque doivent disparaître pour que les menaces diminuent. Ainsi, le consommateur doit comprendre qu'en téléchargeant des applications sur des sites peu sûrs, par exemple pour débloquer une console de jeux ou un téléphone portable, il n'est jamais certain de ce qu'il installe sur son ordinateur et les appareils périphériques.

L'enjeu des données personnelles

La protection des données personnelles connaît une véritable révolution en droit avec l'arrivée des objets connectés. En effet, si la loi Informatique et liberté de 1978 a déjà connu des mises à jour, de nouvelles règles européennes devraient voir le jour à l'horizon 2016. Il s'agit de prendre en considération la masse d'informations personnelles collectées par les objets de la vie quotidienne et exportées sur Internet et des serveurs divers. On sait qu'il est déjà possible de dessiner le profil d'un individu en récupérant ici et là les informations qu'il laisse volontairement sur Internet (il suffit de consulter Facebook pour constater cette réalité). Or les objets connectés non seulement collectent en permanence une multitude d'informations mais, de plus, les échangent avec d'autres objets ou des serveurs sans même que l'utilisateur en soit informé. Qui, aujourd'hui, se soucie par exemple de ce que son téléphone peut bien envoyer lorsque telle ou telle application est utilisée ? Demain, les spécialistes du « big data » pourront tirer de cette mine à ciel ouvert des portraits bien plus fins d'un individu. Ils apprendront tout des habitudes de consommation, des déplacements, des problèmes de santé rien qu'en interrogeant leurs moteurs de recherche spécialisés.

Par ailleurs, la loi de 1978 ne s'applique qu'au territoire français. Dès lors que les serveurs sont à l'étranger, il est difficile de connaître le niveau de protection offert par la législation locale aux données personnelles. D'autre part, l'exception française d'usage personnel autorise l'utilisation domestique de certains systèmes. Dès lors que les objets connectés sont majoritairement utilisés dans un cadre privé, la protection des données par la CNIL ne peut pas s'appliquer... On peut observer également que nombre d'objets naviguent à la lisière du domaine médical, lequel bénéficie d'une forte protection juridique. Que penser en effet des balances connectées, des appareils de sport, des fréquencemètres destinés aux coureurs ou des fourchettes électroniques qui pèsent les denrées et mesurent le temps de mastication entre deux bouchées ? Ces appareils scrutent des données vitales mais échappent actuellement au 2 Voir sur ce point l'article du site vice.com (http://www.vice.com/fr/read/shodan-est-le-moteur-derecherches-le-plus-dangereux-du-monde).

page 2 Note n° 2 du CREOGN Rédacteur : colonel Laurent VIDAL domaine de la médecine. Ce flou est savamment entretenu par les industriels qui ne veulent évidemment pas tuer la poule aux oeufs d'or. En effet, des données de santé ne peuvent être hébergées que sur un serveur agréé, avec des contraintes fortes d'identification pour y accéder. Autant d'obligations qui impliquent des coûts élevés et viennent grignoter les bénéfices. La Food and Drugs Administration 3 américaine a publié un guide sur ces questions, classant les dispositifs connectés en trois catégories. La première regroupe les dispositifs médicaux, la seconde les dispositifs sans lien avec les questions de santé, la troisième recevant quant à elle les appareils sur lesquels la FDA n'a pas d'avis tranché. Ces derniers, qui sont provisoirement considérés comme sans lien avec la santé, peuvent basculer sans préavis dans l'une ou l'autre des deux autres catégories. Sur ces questions, l'administration américaine est donc particulièrement prudente et attend, pour se prononcer, de disposer d'informations complémentaires.

Conclusion

La question de la protection des données personnelles nécessite une attention permanente des autorités. Le droit international en la matière ne donne pas vraiment d'assurances comparables à celles du droit français. Par ailleurs, la mondialisation rend la réflexion complexe. A titre d'illustration, le constructeur de matériel informatique chinois Huawei fait 70 % de chiffre d'affaire à l'étranger. Or le droit chinois est inexistant s'agissant de la protection des données privées. D'autre part, 32 % des composants utilisés viennent des États-Unis, pays qui s'est très récemment illustré dans la collecte internationale et clandestine de données personnelles. Autant d'informations qui invitent pour le moment à considérer avec prudence l'utilisation des moyens connectés, particulièrement pour la conservation d'informations confidentielles et personnelles.

3

  Administration des produits alimentaires et médicamenteux. page 3 Note n° 2 du CREOGN Rédacteur : colonel Laurent VIDAL

OS : Operating system, ensemble des programmes qui dirigent les capacités d'un ordinateur. Par exemple, Linux, Android, Windows 8 sont des OS.Note numéro

mars 2014 Observatoire FIC (CREOGN -CEIS) « Quelle sécurité pour les objets connectés » Mercredi 5 mars 2014 -Quartier des Célestins


Patrick Lagadec

Uri Rosenthal

Brian Jacobs

Louise K Comfort

Ira Helsloot

THE MEGACRISIS UNKNOWN TERRITORY In Search of Conceptual and Strategic Breakthroughs 1

Keywords: Mega-crises, Intelligence stratégique, Pilotage stratégique Mega-crises, Critical Thinking, Strategic Approach Classification

L'univers des crises connaît des bouleversements et des mutations qui obligent à repenser fondamentalement nos cadres d'analyse comme nos logiques d'intervention. Cette contribution vise à cartographier le théâtre d'opérations qui est désormais le nôtre, à clarifier les pièges qui nous guettent ; et surtout, à esquisser des pistes d'innovation -paradigmes, logiques de réponse, formation -, puisque nous ne pourrons traverser les megacrises qui vont désormais être notre lot avec les cadrages cognitifs et opérationnels du siècle dernier.

The nature of major crises has dramatically evolved over the past fewyears: Megcrises become the name of the game. The goal of this contribution is to capture the evolving notion of crisis, and to prepare new references to deal with the new crisis landscapes. The first section aims at building a renewed understanding of the emerging challenges we face -a combination of rogue events made of severity, speed, ignorance, hypercomplexity, inconceivability, and liquefaction-prone contexts that no longer guarantee the "back to normalcy" comforting rule. The second develops the components of a strategic response which includes: a seminal paradigm shift; a switch from management to leadership, and from "Command and Control" to decisive empowerment; and a whole new approach in education and training.

Introduction

The world of crises appears to evolve fast, very fast indeed. In the late 1970s and through the 1980s, much effort was devoted to understanding the complex dynamics triggered by specific events such as a severe flood, a devastating factory explosion, the tampering of a product, a violent protest in a prison or a riot in a town, a football stadium tragedy, a train or a plane hijacking, a financial crisis in single country… The notion of Crisis was put forward, defined, and developed into a new scientific discipline. Soon, in the 1980s and 90s, much was done to clarify some "best practices" to deal with these events and their ripple effects. But, at the turn of the century, the basic "facts" did not fit so well with the "maps" used to read the world of crises, as we knew it. Climate change and environmental issues, vital networks of increasing importance, massive terrorist threats, huge increases in the cost of disasters due to concentration of activities, underlined that our models and mindsets had to be revisited. A quantitative jump had to be taken into account. And now, with the financial meltdown or the pandemic issue, it appears that we are not only confronted with "something more", but by "something else".

A qualitative leap is in fact the problem. Beyond mere specific events, we have to deal with fault-line convergences and global systemic dislocations. We had the intellectual framework and the operational answers; we are now left with a double blank page. We are in a new territory, adrift with no compass, but with the demand to find some new orientation, and decisional and managerial capacities. We are entering the Mega-crisis era.

What is a "Mega-Crisis"? How to deal with that kind of wild reality? We do not have the answers, but a bottom line emerges: a Mega-crisis is not just a bigger crisis. A Mega-crisis does not only call for "something more": it demands "something else". But that "something else" lies in the blind zone: unknown, unmapped, unconceivable within our present mindset, and unmanageable with our usual tools. We urgently need to think and act in a new way: other visions and expectations, other policies and scientific perspectives, other institutional and organizational designs, other "best practices" and education. But, what does all this mean? How to proceed?

The goal of this chapter is -modestly and briefly -to try to clarify that new Mega-crisis issue. Multiple layers are to be considered, to screen what is the same, and what is different. Mega-Crises retain the core basics of crises as we clarified them last century, but are indeed another world. Our responsibility is to try to capture the evolving notion of crisis, and to prepare new references to deal with the new crisis landscapes that are today's core challenge. The U.S. House of Representatives' report asked a most critical question after Hurricane Katrina: "Why do we continually seem one disaster behind?" (2006, p. 359). The imperative, when so much is at stake, is to avoid the all-seasons pitfall -"being a war behind".

1970s-1990s: Crises captured -beyond "emergencies"

Even if the concept was present in Greek culture, even if disaster studies were steadily developed in the 50s and 60s, the real advancement of crisis science dates from the 70s and the 80s. Scholars and decision-makers opened a way to the systematic understanding and managing of specific dynamics triggered by abnormal events and circumstances. Some essential dimensions were clarified -and they are still present in today's crises:

• Crises are vital systemic threats: crises are not just "emergencies" to be looked after by specialized technical organizations. • Crises go hand in hand with deep surprise: they combine "unexpected", unscheduled, unprecedented, apparently unmanageable challenges. • Crises unhinge our most basic bearings: it is necessary to un-learn and re-learn fast and deep. Sticking to old models will be fatal.

These dimensions were captured in various definitions, such as the one offered by Uriel Rosenthal in 1986: "A serious threat to the basic structures of the fundamental values and norms of a social system, which -under time pressure and highly uncertain circumstancesnecessitates making critical decisions". [START_REF] Rosenthal | Crisis Decision Making in the Netherlands[END_REF] But, by nature, there is a degree of contradiction between on the one hand the very essence of crisis -a cross-border dynamic and a shaking up of our systems -and, on the other hand, the Cartesian imperative to fix clear-cut definitions, typologies, maps, and managerial recommendations. Science requires definitions and models, management demands best practices, and it is normal to try to do our best to clarify and help those in charge. Nevertheless, it is essential to be extremely vigilant and avoid being trapped in the models and tools previously built for understanding and action.

Nothing in that clinical picture is to be forgotten. We still have to deal with natural disasters, technological major hazards, social disruptions, international conflicts -the typical events that triggered research into crisis modeling and handling in the 70s and the 80s. We still have to deal with deep surprise and brutal discontinuities, high uncertainty and decision in the fog of war.

Countless manuals and books were published giving best taxonomies, practices and tips to anticipate, prevent, and manage a possible crisis that a complex organization could encounter. More specifically, two "best answers" were praised, and sold to industry and government: "Tools", with crisis doctrines, organizations, plans, centers, drills… "Communication", with camera-ready preparations to help managers in charge to deal with the new dominant stakeholder -the media -and their demands in terms of information, transparency and emotion. All that is still basically necessary [START_REF] Fink | Crisis management. Planning for the Inevitable[END_REF][START_REF] Berge | The First 24 Hours. A comprehensive guide to successful crisis communications[END_REF][START_REF] Lagadec | Preventing Chaos in a Crisis -Strategies for Prevention, Control and Damage Limitation[END_REF][START_REF] Heath | Crisis Management for Managers & Executives[END_REF].

It could be -and it really is -extremely tempting to stop there, and pretend that "There is nothing new under the sun". Nothing new: the same typology of events (if only somewhat bigger today), the same kind of challenge -facing uncertainty. And the same so reassuring managerial answers that were forged and disseminated before the turn of the century, could be certified as the operational guidelines to apply: crisis planning, crisis organization, crisis communication, crisis learning… But sticking to old paradigms and grammars would be fatal: there is the same chasm between the 70s-80s and 2009, as between 1914 and the end of World War II.

Especially in the field of crisis, questioning must prevail with regard to reassuring fixed answers. That imperative was rightly underlined in the last page of the first collective book on "Coping with Crises": "Crisis analysts should take it upon themselves to continuously challenge conventional wisdom concerning crisis management" (Rosenthal, Charles, 'T Hart, 1989, p 472).

Turn of the Century: Crises Spill over -towards systemic disruption

The same scientific network envisaged a revision of the 1989 book, but the editors rapidly measured that a simple update would not do. The first message of their 2001 study was: "What we learn about the development and management of past crises may have limited value for improving the management of tomorrow's crises. The dynamics of future crises will pose new dilemmas for crisis managers". (Rosenthal, Boin, Comfort, 2001, p. vii). New dimensions had to be taken into account to adjust to crises as they developed a decade after the first publication:

• Inconceivability: "The 1990s witnessed many unforeseen and sometimes inconceivable crises." (p. vii) • Complexity and process: "Today's crisis is not a discrete event, but a process unfolding as manifold forces interact in unforeseen and disturbing ways. Modern crises are increasingly characterized by complexity, interdependence, and politicization. " (p. 6) • Embedded feature: "Crises will become ingrained features of society." (p. 343) • New ways of handling, and thinking: "The administrative repertoire of prevention and intervention strategies is unsuited for the increasingly complex and interdependent character of today's and tomorrow's crisis […] New crises require new ways of thinking." (p. 346)

It was not long before reality proved such diagnoses right. A series of "wild" shocks came out of the blue around the turn of the century. Our "house-trained" risks and crises suddenly became savage beasts once more, ignoring the statistics, rules, models, maps and scripts they were supposed to respect.

• 9/11: The incredible. Everything was ready for a real-time reaction in case of geostrategic attack. Yet on that day, the attack came from nowhere: individuals using US airports, US planes, knives and a collective kamikaze strategy, to simultaneously attack the financial, defense and (tentatively) institutional hearts of the world's leading country. The cry of a NORAD official sums it up: "This is not a kind of war we know! We are not ready for this!" (in Lagadec, E. 2007).

• Katrina, 2005: The Perfect Storm. Hurricanes are the best-known natural disasters and have benefited from the best disaster planning, including the best surveillance organizations and practices. Certainly the Deep South was not as well prepared as Florida, and FEMA had been weakened as a result of reorganization following 9/11.

But the core challenge was somewhere else, in the very essence of the event. As Admiral Thad Allen put it: "Katrina was not a hurricane, but nobody understood that. It was a weapon of mass destruction without criminal dimension" [START_REF] Allen | Hurricane Katrina: framing the issue -A weapon of mass destruction without criminal dimension[END_REF]. • Anthrax, November 2001. Lethal poison in the US and thousands of fake white powder packages everywhere on the planet were cause of great concern. Yet the real nature of the issue was discovered when it was understood that the problem was not the poisoned letter in itself, but the essence of the postal technical system: the sorting machines were squeezing out the poison, and letters all around were contaminated and then dispatched in every direction. The discovery was staggering: "My system is their weapon!" [START_REF] Lagadec | Anthrax and Beyond[END_REF]. to solve the 2001 outbreak, since a plan had been written after the latest epidemic in 1967. The Vets were sure of their assessment after two weeks: 15,000 head of cattle were contaminated; and the way out was known: kill and burn the suspicious animals, and shut down the countryside. But their mapping of the issue had become irrelevant, for two main factors: a dense highway system made possible a rapid transfer of thousands of cattle, overnight; European quotas made it attractive (even if illegal) to organize a large "Bed and Breakfast" lending system to help farmers to make up quotas. After two weeks, the number of cattle infected was not 15,000 -but 2 Million. Yet, the shutting down of the countryside was also killing another economic sector: the tourism industry, 20 times more active and profitable than the agricultural sector.

Vets had to leave their seats to the epidemiologists; Agriculture had to abandon its role as lead ministry. "Foot and Mouth had become something else, 2001 was no longer 1967". (Mike Granatt). • SRAS, Hong-Kong, Toronto, 2003. Cities, as ever, appear to be an ideal place for contamination. But the density and speed of modern globalized exchanges has transformed this well-known characteristic. The illness landed in Toronto before WHO had launched a worldwide warning; all hospitals were under severe threat before the Province had understood that the problem was not confined to the first concerned. As the head of the crisis team underlined, a total rethinking was necessary: "The first victim of the epidemics happened to be the plan itself" [START_REF] Young | Leadership in the age of unconventional crises and chaotic environment[END_REF]. • Heat Wave, Europe, 2003. Within a few days, 15,000 people had died in France, 70,000 in Europe. Officials "in charge" were staggered. The disaster did not play by the normal rules -a severe blow, and the sending in of emergency people. The problem was to detect the danger of heat… in summer; to look at heat data during the night, not during the day; to look at the number of days and nights in a row, not at specific values; to look at northern regions, not so much those used to heat; to understand that when people arrived at the hospital it was already too late -the frontline was in homes and nursing homes. There was no ground zero: one or two additional unseen deaths here and there was not considered catastrophic at ground level but, on the whole, the result was incredible. And something well studied after the Chicago Heat Wave in Chicago in 1995 (700 dead, [START_REF] Klinenberg | Heat Wave, A Social Autopsy of Disaster in Chicago[END_REF] was totally foreign to our emergency mental model: the key factor was the social fabric of the cities. Where solidarity and social ties were dense and active, the result was not that serious; wherever loneliness, isolation, or worse: conflict, were dominant, the consequences were catastrophic. It was not a technical question, but a socially embedded issue. All that was far from our intellectual and leadership maps. In France, the first real measures taken were decided the day when the heat wave stopped -too late. The French minister of Health was right when he declared to the parliamentary enquiry: "We did not notice anything". [START_REF] Lagadec | Understanding the French 2003 Heat Wave Experience: Beyond the heat, a Multi-Layered Challenge[END_REF] After such a series of "outside the box" shocks, some key factors were clarified to help understand and handle the extended world of crises. New frontiers had to be considered. New visions had to be forged accordingly.

Our previous visions and tools were rooted as follows: events limited in scale, relatively to the whole systems; probability so low that the magnitude of a potential event could be presented as "acceptable" on a technical basis; independence and isolation of scenes and functions affected; domino effects possible, but rather slow, and limited in extension. That reference map was clearly switching to another -with a number of qualitative leaps:

• Scale and Globalization. A Katrina-like hurricane can devastate an area as big as Great Britain; a blackout can hit a whole continent. Every place can be hit by an imported crisis that originated far away, in space and in time. The seminal notion of "Ground Zero", with the entire system coming to help, has to be revised. Ground Zero is everywhere. • The network factor. Our countries are increasingly dependent on a complex web of interlinked critical infrastructures (energy, water, transportation, information systems, banking systems, public health systems). The remarkable capacities brought by those powerful networks of networks have also brought huge vulnerabilities: when any of these systems fails, the whole is on the brink of across-the-board blackout (Auerswald, Brancomb, LaPorte and Michel-Kerjan, 2006;[START_REF] Boin | Preparing for Critical Infrastructure Breakdowns: The Limits of Crisis Management and the Need for Resilience[END_REF][START_REF] Boin | Critical Infrastructures under Threat : Learning from the Anthrax Scare[END_REF]). • Speed. The SARS episode in 2003 showed how, in just a few hours, the virus could jump from Hong Kong to Toronto. On 14 August 2003, the northeastern part of North America plunged into darkness in a matter of 20 seconds. Today, an electronic glitch could shut down our information systems worldwide within a minute [START_REF] Cukier | Critical Information Infrastructure Protection, Ensuring (And Insuring ?) Critical Information Infrastructure Protection, A Report of the 2005[END_REF]. Minutes for the attacks, days and weeks at least for the organizations in charge. • Hypercomplexity. Hurricane Katrina illustrates the leap on the complexity scale.

Katrina caused persistent flooding, a series of industrial disasters, critical evacuation challenges, widespread lethal pollution, the destruction of 90% of the essential utility networks (energy, communications, water etc.), unprecedented public safety concerns, concern over the possible loss of the port area (which is essential to the continent's economy), even uncertainty as to whether portions of the city could be saved. • The Inconceivable. This is potentially the most destabilizing element of all. America had expected missiles, but was hit by its own hijacked commercial planes. We thought global epidemics were a thing of the past, and, lo and behold, the specter of a pandemic has returned. What would it mean today to lose a major urban centre, a hub city? • Information Super Storms. Yesterday's imperative for crisis managers was to pass on information to the media rapidly and clearly. They are now dealing with unbelievably powerful mass-media networks that have their own "situation rooms". Everyone, starting with the manager, tunes in to CNN (or other major networks), at any breaking news signal. More: the Internet swarms the global scene, myriads of sources are brought to bear on a situation. And new tools also transform the whole stage: during 7/7 in London, whoever could not instantly reach someone in London thought the nonanswering person was to be among the victims (Granatt, Lagadec, 2005). • Ignorance. We were well accustomed to considering and handling "uncertainty". We now often find ourselves moving to ignorance (LaPorte, 1994). The problem is no longer to identify what we "still" don't know, at the limit of our knowledge, but more modestly to try to discern what parcel of our available knowledge really is robust enough to answer the surge of questioning from all sides that modern crises elicit, and to guide us through them when all else fails. Ignorance grows with the incredible advance of technology (nanotechnology, GMO, etc.). What's more, exploding hypercomplexity, interdependence, and inconceivability feed the engine of ignorance. Too much to process, too much instability: our tools, visions, and grammars are overwhelmed. And, on top of that, a further dilemma will be embedded in many of the crises to come: the impossibility of knowing, right at the beginning, if we are really confronted with something huge… or with a non-event. Both are possible: the mad cow disease did not cause millions of victims, as warned by some; the 2003 European heat-wave caused 70 000 deaths in Europe, when so many proclaimed it was just a little heat in summer…

The new agenda of the 21 st Century Mega-Crises: Global dislocations

Up to now, at least in the last decades, the world was subject to disasters, but was fundamentally robust -a specific disaster, even if extremely severe is not a global systemic failure. Crises were, in our experience and intelligence, difficult times, with serious ripple effects to be contained. But "the whole" was not itself crisis prone. Those conditions are now intrinsically mutating. Our fundamental approach to risk has been "the breach in the dike" strategy. We are discovering that the "dikes" themselves are subject to in-depth "liquefaction" or dislocation.

• "Natural" environment. Climate change, water scarcity and pollution, soil loss through wind and water erosion, air pollution, virus circulation, can all produce major intercontinental and worldwide imbalances -and acute problems for cities. • "Tightly-coupled" global systems. In the 1980s, we began to consider the risks of "tightly coupled" systems [START_REF] Perrow | Normal Accidents, Living with high risk technologies[END_REF][START_REF] Perrow | The Next Catastrophe -Reducing Our Vulnerabilities to Natural, Industrial, and Terrorist Disasters[END_REF]. What we now have is not only a coupling of critical technical systems, but a civilization based essentially on interlinkages that are generalized, dynamic, and largely invisible, even to the operators most directly concerned. The global economy demands this structural fragility. The question of vulnerability, then, becomes a structural embedded problem, linked to the very way our systems function. • Geostrategy, Violence. Globalization opens innumerable fault lines between peoples who, in the past, had been somewhat isolated from each other. • Economy. The 2008-2009 period has been the most challenging example of the global tendency to glide from a crisis to a meltdown -from the "subprime crisis" to the financial, and then economic-social quake.

We are discovering that any disturbance can stir multi-dimension phenomena, each faultline (economic, for instance) connecting to another (social), and another (violence), etc. The contamination is not only "rapid": it appears "instantly systemic". The best analogy is the super-cooled liquid, which appears "normal" and can, after just a slight blow, abruptly crystallize. That kind of environment defies our basic Cartesian logic, which sustains our visions, organizational design, and even crisis philosophy.

A telling first outward sign of this new reality has been the Financial-economic meltdown. The financial sector was the jewel of our economic system, home to the brightest experts in risks and the most advanced tools, with an incredible international regulation system perfectly aware of the seriousness of potential crises -1929's Black Thursday crash was studied by all in all business schools in the world. And yet, in the wake of the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the Senate Majority Leader, Senator Reid, came on the air to declare: "No one knows what to do. We are in a new territory here. This is a new game. You can ask Bernanke, you can ask Paulson, they don't know what to do." (CNN, 18 09 2008).

The second has been the A-H1N1 flu pandemic that emerged in March-April 2009 in Mexico. First fact: the financial-economic global meltdown was not the extravagant outcome of an isolated problem. The same "model" of dislocation would prevail in case of other kinds of global failure. Second fact: medical circles are on call, but the real strategic problem is the combination of that shock wave with other global fault-lines: finance, economy, social…

The obsession must be, as ever in crisis, to avoid "fighting the last war". What are the main characteristics of "Mega-Crises"? The following chart is a tentative starting point to try to capture the notion.

• Global dislocation. The focus is no longer the "event" (and its domino effects), but the potential liquefaction of our bedrocks, disintegration of links, destruction of most basic references -which open the way to "black hole" dynamics swallowing everything and every usual mode of response.

• Multiple concomitant and interlinked scenes of crises. Even if "all hazards"

approaches are always recommended, our basic philosophy of disaster and crisis management is still focused, channeled. Multiple scenes and kinds of crises now confront us, at the same time, each of them feeding the others -like rogue waves that take their colossal energy from other nearby waves. • Systemic blackouts. The problem is no longer the possible domino effect from one system to another but the global common freezing of all, since interdependencies are now total. A world without borders opens the way to crises without borders.

• Instant crystallizing dynamics. The time scale is just compressed to nothing. Our systems, especially social systems, are in "super-cooled" phase, exposed to abrupt possible crystallization. • From accidental failure to embedded function. We were prepared to think of the world as stable, with some "accidents" from time to time; to see crises as difficult moments to navigate before coming back to normalcy -and even as opportunities to exploit to be stronger after the crisis. Here comes a world whose very "engine" is Mega-Crisis itself -the principle of evolution. The challenge is no longer to make sure the sea remains calm, but to be prepared to sail basically stormy, wild, uncharted oceans.

A definition to capture this new state of the world could sound like:

Mega-Crisis: "The embedded engine of a chaotic world that evolves and mutates through global dynamics whose texture is made up of complex, unstable webs of constant, global, major dislocations."

Such a vista calls for reinvented landmarks and practices.

• Intelligence: Beyond Cartesian logic. Whatever the country, our basic philosophy is that the world is like a marvelous Swiss watch: the knowledge of each part drives to the most efficient management of the whole. We enter a world were chaos is not the rare ultimate possibility. But we do not have the grammar for anything like that and our institutions are not at all prepared to deal with intrinsically unstable environments. It has been said that Descartes had in mind to produce two sets of "Rules". He wrote the first, specific to a "knowable" world. He didn't write for the "unknowable world". We now need to try to draft at least some new maps for that very kind of world we are now entering.

• Psychic resilience. Crisis is profoundly destabilizing for somebody who is only prepared to manage according to solid rules, anchored on solid ground, and selected for his/her "inside the box" excellence. Hence there can be a dramatic refusal to search for, to acknowledge, to take charge and handle extra-ordinary crises. This explains why it is so difficult to open questions without pre-given answers already at hand, why simulations mostly test the ability to apply given rules within given robust frameworks, and almost never to explore Terra Incognita; and why leaders are so frequently absent from simulation exercises. If that situation is not changed, if every void is perceived as a life-threatening issue, there is no chance of developing any real capability to grasp the emerging mega-crisis era. People will react like those biological cells that "choose" to commit "suicide", rather to resist and invent, when faced to unidentified high-level danger.

• Policy vision: shaping the future. The traditional focus -back to normalcy, business continuity -will be less and less meaningful. People in charge, and numerous unmapped stakeholders, will have to write new blank pages, to sketch the future -or more exactly various possible futures [START_REF] Rosenthal | From the periphery to the core[END_REF]. Creativity must come first, exactly at the opposite of the traditional implementation of preplanned responses. The pitfall is precisely that we are culturally and technically prepared to do exactly the opposite -respond with the known solutions. Yet it is only the ability to detect the very same signs, though smaller. What is needed now is the ability to detect "something else", something "outside the box", something not previously modeled. You do not even know what you are searching for. You must be trained to detect off-the-radar dynamics. Generally, those "unidentified objects" are in the blind zone. And, if they do become visible to some, it may instantly provoke a strange sort of paralysis: the unknown triggers instant and decisive denial. The challenge is to educate people to detect, to cope with, and to work with something that does not belong to a well recognized and already managed problem. 6 • Leadership. "At all levels of government, we must build a leadership corps populated by leaders who are prepared to exhibit innovation and take the initiative during extremely trying circumstances" (The White House, 2006, p. 72). This is an impossible challenge if leadership is still maintained in the realm of "management"the most efficient implementation of the best tools, in a difficult but globally mapped situation. In the Mega-crisis territory, the challenge is to draw some new maps, to invent rules and tools to rise to the occasion. People and groups have to acknowledge and to face the blank page. Leaders have to break through the conventional limits, to slip across old boundaries and invent new collective responses -and they know that they will be punished if they do not followed the "normal" practices. This supposes that he/she is able to avoid the pitfalls that are always present in extreme crises: personal paralysis, bureaucratic inertia (where each organization waits till the crisis fits its codes and rules), the general loss of nerve along the entire chains of command, and all those who, suddenly confronted with the unfamiliar, will brutally glide from denial to despair.

• Organizational design. The point is not to have the good chain of command to process the good answers, but the best collective dynamics to inspire the best creativity, cohesion, and initiative. Boyd's OODA loop concept can be of great help in clarifying the task: Observation, Orientation, Decision, Action [START_REF] Granatt | Navigating unknown storms -Maps and Tools for Leadership[END_REF]. Observation, to detect the "inconceivable". Orientation, to re-adjust the reading of very strangely and very rapidly unfolding processes. Decision-making, to take advantage of any unscripted opportunities. Action, far from the prudent "wait and see attitude". The design of organizations has to be conceived so that such a loop can be followed, in real time. Speed is of the essence.

• Strategic intelligence: "Rapid Reflection Forces". Leaders must have at hand people who are familiar with engaging chaos and who are given to thinking openly in unreadable situations. The concept and practice of the Rapid Reflection Force -RFFhas been forged to foster and protect the ability to open questions and forge new initiatives. It has been implemented for example in EDF (Electricité de France, the premier French public utility in the energy sector, and the leading worldwide nuclear operator). Along with the more conventional crisis teams -operations, communication, logistics, and top management -such RRF teams engage in four broad lines of questioning:

• What is the essence of the problem? The intelligence front involves a constant battle to frame, anticipate, detect and clarify the nature of the crisis, surprises, domino effects, escalation dynamics, and the general mutations that can be triggered. By definition, it is not possible to grasp all the essential issues at stake in a crisis that is new, unclear and chaotic. • What are the major pitfalls? When the pressure of events becomes extreme, when bearings are lost, the normal tendency is to become mired in highly counterproductive ruts. It is crucial, immediately, to think about the major stumbling blocks to avoid. And the first is a wrong framing of the issue. • What is the map of actors; what networks are needed? Extreme crises strike at the system in ways that are hard to anticipate, and that may differ depending on the people concerned. At the same time, the new issues will have to be handled with new players. New maps will be needed both for diagnosis and for action, and they will have to be adjusted or remodeled throughout the ordeal. • What constructive initiatives can the RFF suggest? The most important thing is not to pore over statistical lists or to compile all the information possible, but rather to try to discern one or a few critical initiatives that could introduce "a new ballgame", help us escape our crisis-induced mental ruts, and launch "virtuous circles". Experience shows that these Rapid Reflection Forces are crucial for Executive Committees, from blowing the whistle ("there is a crisis, wake up"), to re-checking the organizational response, and above all to outline some creative initiatives to transform the global dynamics [START_REF] Béroux | Implementing Rapid Reflection Forces[END_REF], 2008). After two years of implementation, the quintessential power of the Rapid Reflection Force innovation is coming to the fore. Fundamentally, the RRF is not just another organizational tool providing additional answers. The RRF manifests the necessity of an open-minded, questioning, creative stance, beyond the usual mere application of previous models and mindsets.

• Empowerment. The years 1990-2000 were dominated by the idea of "Communication". Information had to be given to the public, as a democratic requirement. That represented an important step forward since our tradition in times of disaster was the "Command and Control" model -the concentration of decisionmaking in a cloistered hierarchical structure, and the restriction of information. It appeared that other approaches were now required. Bringing coherence to a great number of entities could not be achieved with an approach to governance that was restrictive, vertical, compartmentalized, and designed to minimize information. And informing the public was an imperative in a media-dominated world.

We must now go much further. The issue is not to be "a bit more transparent" than before, but rather to take on board, in theory and in practice, the requirements of collective response in a chaotic world. Today's environment now demands dynamic linkages, fluidity and speed, shared information, and collective confidence. Information becomes critical, even for operational reasons. Because public bodies are not the only one on the front line: "The 'first' responders on 9/11, as in most catastrophes, were private civilians. Because 85 percent of our nation's critical infrastructure is controlled not by government but by private sector, private-sector civilians are likely to be the first responders in any future catastrophe" (National Commission, 2003, p. 317). The issue is not to Reassure and Command, but to Inform and Combine. This was the lesson of 9/11 [START_REF] Dwyer | 102 Minutes -The Untold Story of the Fight to Survive Inside the Twin Towers[END_REF], the lesson of Katrina [START_REF] Honoré | Survival -How a Culture of Preparedness Can Save You And Your Family From Disasters[END_REF]. This was the same seminal lesson of the 1918-Pandemic: "The fear, not the disease, threatened to break the society apart" (Barry, 2006, p. 461). Abraham Lincoln, quoted by Barry as the final words of his book, clarifies the ultimate issue: "Those in authority must retain the public's trust. The way to do it is to distort nothing, to put the best face on nothing, to try to manipulate no one. Lincoln said that first, and best. Leadership must make whatever horror exists concrete. Only then will people be able to break it apart" (Barry, 2006, p. 461).

• Training. The goal is not to strive to foresee the unforeseeable but to train ourselves to cope with it. Not to clarify, map and plan for every single surprise, but to train to be surprised (LaPorte, 2007a[START_REF] Laporte | Anticipating Rude Surprises: Reflections on "Crisis Management[END_REF]. Doing that is not difficult. It just calls for: a) leaders fully open to the idea that their responsibility goes beyond just sitting in a crowded room and giving some order from time to time; b) specific short seminars where top leaders are given some new landmarks, showed operational examples of new kinds of leadership, and invited to practice through unconventional brief simulations.

Conclusion

The issue is so complex that many would call for a "wait and see" attitude: wait for stronger evidence ("Are we absolutely sure there is anything really new?"), for better definitions and taxonomies ("Are we definitively sure to have a perfect understanding before anything else?"), and stick to science-and business-as-usual best practices as we know them.

Facing such unknowns is an all-seasons issue. The "Age of Discovery" experience is probably worth bearing in mind as we now enter a new age of complexity. The most challenging issues are the vastness of the unknown, and the fierce resistance of those who are so at ease with conventional knowledge: "More than half the world was unexplored, unmapped, and misunderstood by the Europeans. Throughout the sixteenth-century, the calculations and theories of the ancient Greek and Egyptians mathematicians and astronomers served as the basis of cosmology, even as new discoveries undermined time-honoured assumptions. To reach his goal, Magellan would have to master both a great Ocean Sea and a sea of ignorance." (Bergreen, 2004, p. 73;10).

The sharp difference with the Age of Discovery is that, today, we do not have the choicestay within the well-known Mediterranean world, or decide to explore off-limits; and the exploration is not just a problem of some intrepid sailors. We all are sailing far away on rough waters, somewhere in unknown oceans swept by "high probability-high impact" rogue waves. And, beneath the storms, increasingly numerous, we are discovering that our smart yachts are fitted out for the protected bays of the America's Cup, not for the furies of Cape Horn.

The issue is so disturbing that many will certainly proclaim that they will be "no Cassandra". Ironically, those ritual words only too well demonstrate a poor knowledge of Greek mythology: Cassandra is not the lunatic character howling monstrous nonsense day after day; she is the one who speaks the truth -but whom Apollo has deprived of the capacity to be believed. And we know that the first to display their "optimism", are also the first to swing from denial to despair when reality strikes.

There is no other way than considering reality with lucidity, even -especially -if the situation is new, threatening, and demanding. It calls for intellectual courage -even if we know after Thomas [START_REF] Kuhn | The Structure of Scientific Revolutions[END_REF] that paradigm shift is not most welcomed in science: "Normal science often suppresses fundamental novelties because they are necessarily subversive of its basic commitments." 1 (p. 5) As early as 1975, Todd LaPorte (1975) set forth the inescapable responsibility to learn to act in a complex environment: "As organized social complexity increases, we must act when we cannot foresee consequences; we must plan when we cannot know; we must organize when we cannot control. In combination, these certainties change the context of politics, planning, and organizational designs" (p. 345). The situation is just becoming more and more pressing thirty-five years after.

The urgency is to grasp the full potential of our emerging risks and crises. Optimism is in keeping with the faith in our capacity and determination to meet the challenges as they are. Some precedents can give us the strength needed to do so. For instance, the brilliant case of the building up of the U.S. Medical School in the late nineteenth century and at the beginning of the twentieth, shortly before the 1918 worldwide pandemic: "The story of the 1918 influenza virus is not simply one of havoc, death and desolation […]. It is also a story of science, of discovery, of how one thinks, and of how one changes the way one thinks […]. [It] was the first great collision between nature and modern science. […] Shortly before the Great War began, the men who wanted to transform American medicine succeeded. They created a system that could produce people capable of thinking in a new way, capable of challenging the natural order." (Barry, 2004, p. 7) We need that kind of mutation today as we are facing our own globalized "Perfect Storms". It behoves us -scientists, decision-makers, lay-citizens -to make the same creative 1 Kuhn is so right that, even in a very serious book, entirely devoted to ultimate Global Catastrophic Risks [START_REF] Bostrom | Global Castastrophic Risks[END_REF] -those that threaten the very survival of Mankind itself -scientists (or some at least) appear prisoners of the past. In his chapter on the "Cognitive biases potentially affecting judgment of global risks", Elizer [START_REF] Yudkowsky | Cognitive biases potentially affecting judgement of global risks[END_REF], even if he acknowledges: "Substantially large numbers, such as 500 million deaths, and especially qualitatively different scenarios such as the extinction of the entire human species, seem to trigger a different mode of thinking", can decide and justify: "I thought it better that this essay should focus on mistakes well documented in the literature -the general literature of cognitive psychology, because there is not yet experimental literature specific to the psychology of existential risks." (p. 114). Another author, Edwin Dennis Kilbourne, in his chapter on "Plagues and pandemics: past, present and future", can write: "In dealing with the novel and the unforeseen […] we must be guided by the lessons of the past" (p. 303) step, but on a larger scale and deeper depth. To see, understand, and act according to the new realities we have to deal with. We can't just wait for the teacher's handbook of risk-free definitions and taxonomies. Camus's character in his famous novel The Plague sets the tone: "This is not a question of words, this is a question of time". When issues are that vital, personal and collective commitments are of the essence. Let's take ourselves in hand to prove that we are up the risks and crises we ourselves have constructed. This is our core responsibility at this crossroads. Shying away is not an option.

•

  Beyond "weak signals". Basic training is devoted to the detection of well-known signals. Advanced training is focused on "weak signals": the detection of faint signs.

•

  Crises confront us with another time dynamics: speed and rhythm have to be redefined, real time sets the tempo.• Crises go hand in hand with uncertainty: you never enter a crisis with a clear expertise nor a given decision-making roadmap. • Crises call for decisions: this is not a time to delay and to wait for results of studies or for consensus, but to decide, and decide fast, in the dark, within conflicts. • Crises confronts us with discontinuities: suddenly, fault-lines open, facts go the extremes, statistics are of poor help, restoring pre-crisis normalcy or returning to business as usual is beside the point.

  • Continental Blackouts. Canada, January 1998; East North America, 14 August 2003 (US-Canada, 2004); Italy, September 2003; Europe, 5 November 2006: large urban areas plunge into darkness; a thousand miles away, airport hubs are subject to traffic congestion. Canadian experts had it right when they defined the problem: "We were prepared for technical mishaps, not to deal with system destruction." • Foot and Mouth, UK, 2001. The ministry of Agriculture thought they had everything