 So, welcome Michael Todd, Professor Michael Todd. We are very happy that we can talk to you here just before the final conference of the cost action T14 or 2 on quantifying the value of structural health monitoring. Maybe I start. Can you outline your activities and the action and how you somehow came into this action? Yes, I appreciate the opportunity to share with you my interactions with you. I suppose my main action has been deliberately collaborative over the last two years through knowing you, Sebastian, through we met through the structural health monitoring conference network. As a consequence, I was able to attend your cost action summer workshop or academy this past summer in 2018 and deliver a lecture on how my research area in linking structural health monitoring to decision costs and in a framework of Bayesian inference was related to some of the main themes of your cost action. And as a consequence of that interaction, we've grown that interaction. Our activity has substantially increased, I think, from that starting point of identifying some common themes in where we're working on and that several of the groups on the cost action are working on. So I can certainly talk more about those as asked, but that's so far has been our primary initial activity. And Mikey, of course, you knew the topic of the action before starting this collaboration, but is there something new that you have learned about the topic or about the structure of the project, something that maybe you don't have in the United States and we have in the construction? I don't know. Yes. I think what I have learned is just how rigorously in terms of a framework, the action has developed a mechanism for quantifying the value of SHM. I have always thought, and I've even written, that the number one reason why structural health monitoring isn't done broadly in the entire world already because many of the technical developments that lead to the kinds of decisions we need to make have already been figured out. But the reason it's not been developed is that linking it to the business case and linking it to the operations case of why you'd want to invest and maintain a structural health monitoring network for a given application has never really been addressed. And industry has tried in limited ways in the U.S. and Europe, I'm sure, as well to do this. But this is the first time I've ever seen a concerted academic industry effort to sort out a framework that is broadly applicable, it can be used by anyone and adapted to anyone within this context of decision theory, which is a well-known but not so well-known engineering framework for making cost-effective decisions. So I've learned a tremendous amount about that particular central aspect, and I suspect that if this cost action launches into new phases of industry collaboration that it really has a good chance of becoming the default adopted framework. Okay, thank you very much for these points. This is very well-defined also with our thinking and our motivation and intentions when we started. And towards the network, we have quite a large network built in Europe, and we had a chance within this project to spread out a little to especially U.S. And we are very happy that you are one of the management committee observers that did this network. We have been building up also influenced your network. Yes, well, it has very clearly influenced my network. As you well know, we have been able to integrate our common networks. We put together special sessions with both of you in probably what would be considered the world's premier health monitoring conference, truly an international conference. So we are trying to make this topic a keynote address for this important conference. And I think that by itself will continue to amplify the network as people realize what's being done and will sort of bring collaborators who are contributing to different aspects of this into the network. So it certainly influenced my network personally, obviously, through working with both of you in different ways and having the opportunity to have you, Sebastian, visit us for a period of time that I think truly influenced some of my students' research work and helped look at how some synergistic ways in science and engineering that we were thinking about the problem are absolutely very consistent with your framework that you've been developing. And I think that's all part of building the network as we realize we're commonly approaching the problem. Another point that you partially touched already, but maybe you can say something more, what do you think has been or will be the impact of the action for industry and for society as well? And how it can be maybe increased in the United States as far as you know? Yeah, that's a good question. So I definitely reiterate that what I appreciate about the framework is its generality and the way it can be adopted or adapted for a particular application and a particular business model that an industry adopter might have. The framework has these capabilities and so that can really influence business if they don't feel like they have to make tremendous change to how they do their business now to actually assess whether to invest in structural health monitoring if they can just adopt this framework fit it to their controls and move on to make those assessments. Now, I think one of the unfortunate things is that while there are certainly large scale collaborative efforts that might rival cost actions in America, there are none to my knowledge in this area. And it would be certainly for the future of cost, it would be very beneficial if there's a way that the EU and the funding sources that support this action could collaborate with American funding sources to come up with a joint program so that we can really tap into the full network and get American industry to buy into this. I think American industry, one slight challenge that it has, very generally speaking of course there are always exceptions, but one challenge American industry has compared to my understanding of many European industries is their shorter time horizon upon which they expect results, less interested in investing in medium term R&D. So in some sense this cost action has already done the R&D and I think American industry could be poised in the next phase to support token projects where where we the researchers help them implement this framework into their business model. We just need the right mechanism between I don't know if it's EU and American science and engineering funding agencies to figure out how to talk the right language to to support. Okay, thank you very much for these points. This answers a large part of our questions already and of course we are thinking especially now about future ways of continuing this effort, but not just continuing basically spreading out on different levels and across Europe, US and also towards the East and the Southeast China and Australia. So in this sense we thank you very much for the interview. We are extremely happy that you joined this action that we could talk to you and that we can keep in touch and we very keep in touch. We appreciate that. It has truly been an influential personal and professional interaction. I congratulate you on this action and I look forward to hearing how the final conference turns out and how I can help you contribute to whatever the next phase seems to be for the action. Thank you Mike.