Post on 27-Dec-2015
2
UF Landmine Detection System
UF Mine Detection Technology
What does it do?
– Identifies landmines based on GPR image
What is it?
– Neural network classifier
– GPR signal pre-processing and pos-processing
– Neural network training method
3
UF Landmine Detection System
Potential Benefits
Improved probability of detection
Reduced rate of false positive
Increase rate of clearance
Optimize software for particular environmental conditions
4
UF Landmine Detection System
UF Technology Status
Successfully tested in laboratory setting
Successfully demonstrated training strategy
5
UF Landmine Detection System
Train software to recognize mines in field conditions.
Train software to recognize mines in field conditions.
Technology must be tested in real demining environments.
Technology must be tested in real demining environments.
Next Steps
NN Training Field Testing
Incorporate Feedback
Next Steps
Incorporate feedback from personnel in the field to aid product adoption.
Incorporate feedback from personnel in the field to aid product adoption.
Code must be converted Code must be converted
Productize Technology
8
UF Landmine Detection System
Geopolitical
Landmines kill and maim long after the war is over
90% of those killed are civilians
It costs ~$3 to place a mine
It costs $300 to $1000 to detect it and remove it
~20,000 people are killed each year
9
UF Landmine Detection System
The Future
Despite global political
movements and treaties the
global landmine and UXO threat
is increasing
Child standing next to a mine. Colombia
10
UF Landmine Detection System
Technology Hurdles
High cost of clearance
– Traditional technology is low cost but labor intensive
– 100% detection is required to declare an area clear
– Slow process
Detection
False Alarms
11
UF Landmine Detection System
Humanitarian Mine Detection Technologies
Maturity
Cost and ComplexityLow High
Available
Far
Metal Detectors
Strong fit with market criteria
Medium fit with market criteria
Weak fit with market criteria
IR
Bio-sensor
GPR
Neutron Activation Analysis
Nuclear Quadruple Activation
Market Analysis
14
UF Landmine Detection System
The Proposed Strategy is centered around four cornerstones
Field TestField Test
ProductizeProductize
SellSell
LicenseLicense
Field test technology with common GPRsDetermine technological advantagesQuantify performance in varied field conditions
Ensure technology meets landmine detection GPR requirementsDevelop compatible and flexible softwareTest software integrated to commercial GPR
Sell firm to market insider
Licence software (not immediately feasible but should be evaluated)
15
UF Landmine Detection System
SWOT AnalysisStrengths Built on mature GPR platform Allows for faster detection of mines Allows for significant reduction in false positives Allows for smaller demining teams resulting in net savings since the largest expense utilizing current metal detection technologies is the cost of labor.
Weakness Remains untested in field Out of over 750 different types of mines,
currently only recognizes approx. 200 types
Opportunities A true understanding of field conditions can be gained from visiting mined areas allowing for field testing and adaptation based on user input. DOD is already funding GPR as a viable technology
Threats Loss of political will to continue funding GPR may not be approved by UN GPR may not be adopted by commercial
contractors or local demining teams Another technology may become dominate in
the market in the time it takes to field test and refine the product.
Trend in the market is moving towards multi-sensor systems
16
UF Landmine Detection System
Financial Analysis Two Sets of Projections: Developers and Buyout Investors
Strategy and Time Horizon
Assumptions Drawn from Prior Research
– 2006 Geneva International Centre’s Guidebook on Detection Technologies
– 2002 European Union Cost-Benefits Study
Basic Assumptions: Market Share Units Sold
Price Development Costs
Capital Structure Labor
What’s in it For Investors?
17
UF Landmine Detection System
Product LifecycleSales Volume vs. Profits
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
1 3 5 7 9 11Year
Unit Sales
Net Profits
18
UF Landmine Detection System
(in thousands) DEVELOPMENT PHASE P R O D U C T I O N P H A S E
FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014
Net Profits from Operations $ (1,078) $ (1,060) $ (1,267) $ 775 $ 1,086 $ 1,366 $ 1,481 $ 1,457
Total Uses of Cash 50 10 10 229 804 531 494 471
Sources of Cash:
Net Sale of Company $ (2,891)
Investor Capital Calls $ 2,000 $ 2,891 $ 109 $ - $ - $ -
Grants 500 500 500 - - - - -
Subtotal $ 2,500 $ 500 $ 500 $ 109 $ - $ - $ - $ -
Net Financing Activities 1,920 (480) (1,440) 1,440 - - - -
$ (144) $ (144) $ (144) $ (144) $ (144)
Net Sources/Uses of Cash 3,303 (1,038) (2,206) 1,962 149 702 855 854
Cash at Beginning of Period $ - $ 3,303 $ 2,265 $ 59 $ 2,021 $ 2,170 $ 2,872 $ 3,727
Cash at End of Period 3,303 2,265 59 2,021 2,170 2,872 3,727 4,581
CASH FLOW PROJECTIONS MOST LIKELY SCENARIO
19
UF Landmine Detection System
Year 2
+$1,377k
+$785k
-$3.0 millionInitial Buyout
Year 1
t0
Year 5Year 3 Year 4+$1,097k
+$1,492k
+$1,470k
Peak in Profit Growth
First Five YearsIRR 45%
What’s in it for the Buyout Investors?
What’s in it for the Developers?
End of Year 3Year
2
($2,000k)Capital Contributions
Year 1 $2,891k
Proceeds from Sale of Firm
t0
45% ROI
Development Phase Production and Sales Phase