JPEG Column: 79th JPEG Meeting in La Jolla, California, U.S.A.

The JPEG Committee had its 79th meeting in La Jolla, California, U.S.A., from 9 to 15 April 2018.

During this meeting, JPEG had a final celebration of the 25th anniversary of its first JPEG standard, usually known as JPEG-1. This celebration coincides with two interesting facts. The first was the approval of a reference software for JPEG-1, “only” after 25 years. At the time of approval of the first JPEG standard a reference software was not considered, as it is common in recent image standards. However, the JPEG committee decided that was still important to provide a reference software, as current applications and standards can largely benefit on this specification. The second coincidence was the launch of a call for proposals for a next generation image coding standard, JPEG XL. This standard will define a new representation format for Photographic information, that includes the current technological developments, and can become an alternative to the 25 years old JPEG standard.

An informative two-hour JPEG Technologies Workshop marked the 25th anniversary celebration on Friday April 13, 2018. The workshop had presentations of several committee members on the current and future JPEG committee activity, with the following program:

IMG_4560

Touradj Ebrahimi, convenor of JPEG, presenting an overview of JPEG technologies.

  • Overview of JPEG activities, by Touradj Ebrahimi
  • JPEG XS by Antonin Descampe and Thomas Richter
  • HTJ2K by Pierre-Anthony Lemieux
  • JPEG Pleno – Light Field, Point Cloud, Holography by Ioan Tabus, Antonio Pinheiro, Peter Schelkens
  • JPEG Systems – Privacy and Security, 360 by Siegfried Foessel, Frederik Temmermans, Andy Kuzma
  • JPEG XL by Fernando Pereira, Jan De Cock

After the workshop, a social event was organized where a past JPEG committee Convenor, Eric Hamilton was recognized for key contributions to the JPEG standardization.

La Jolla JPEG meetings comprise mainly the following highlights:

  • Call for proposals of a next generation image coding standard, JPEG XL
  • JPEG XS profiles and levels definition
  • JPEG Systems defines a 360 degree format
  • HTJ2K
  • JPEG Pleno
  • JPEG XT
  • Approval of the JPEG Reference Software

The following summarizes various activities during JPEG’s La Jolla meeting.

JPEG XL

Billions of images are captured, stored and shared on a daily basis demonstrating the self-evident need for efficient image compression. Applications, websites and user interfaces are increasingly relying on images to share experiences, stories, visual information and appealing designs.

User interfaces can target devices with stringent constraints on network connection and/or power consumption in bandwidth constrained environments. Even though network capacities are improving globally, bandwidth is constrained to levels that inhibit application responsiveness in many situations. User interfaces that utilize images containing larger resolutions, higher dynamic ranges, wider color gamuts and higher bit depths, further contribute to larger volumes of data in higher bandwidth environments.

The JPEG Committee has launched a Next Generation Image Coding activity, referred to as JPEG XL. This activity aims to develop a standard for image coding that offers substantially better compression efficiency than existing image formats (e.g. more than 60% improvement when compared to the widely used legacy JPEG format), along with features desirable for web distribution and efficient compression of high-quality images.

To this end, the JPEG Committee has issued a Call for Proposals following its 79th meeting in April 2018, with the objective of seeking technologies that fulfill the objectives and scope of a Next Generation Image Coding. The Call for Proposals (CfP), with all related info, can be found at jpeg.org. The deadline for expression of interest and registration is August 15, 2018, and submissions to the Call are due September 1, 2018. To stay posted on the action plan for JPEG XL, please regularly consult our website at jpeg.org and/or subscribe to our e-mail reflector.

 

JPEG XS

This project aims at the standardization of a visually lossless low-latency lightweight compression scheme that can be used as a mezzanine codec for the broadcast industry, Pro-AV and other markets such as VR/AR/MR applications and autonomous cars. Among important use cases identified one can mention in particular video transport over professional video links (SDI, IP, Ethernet), real-time video storage, memory buffers, omnidirectional video capture and rendering, and sensor compression in the automotive industry. During the La Jolla meeting, profiles and levels have been defined to help implementers accurately size their design for their specific use cases. Transport of JPEG XS over IP networks or SDI infrastructures, are also being specified and will be finalized during the next JPEG meeting in Berlin (July 9-13, 2018). The JPEG committee therefore invites interested parties, in particular coding experts, codec providers, system integrators and potential users of the foreseen solutions, to contribute to the specification process. Publication of the core coding system as an International Standard is expected in Q4 2018.

 

JPEG Systems – JPEG 360

The JPEG Committee continues to make progress towards its goals to define a common framework and definitions for metadata which will improve the ability to share 360 images and provide the basis to enable new user interaction with images.  At the 79th JPEG meeting in La Jolla, the JPEG committee received responses to a call for proposals it issued for JPEG 360 metadata. As a result, JPEG Systems is readying a committee draft of “JPEG Universal Metadata Box Format (JUMBF)” as ISO/IEC 19566-5, and “JPEG 360” as ISO/IEC 19566-6.  The box structure defined by JUMBF allows JPEG 360 to define a flexible metadata schema and the ability to link JPEG code streams embedded in the file. It also allows keeping unstitched image elements for omnidirectional captures together with the main image and descriptive metadata in a single file.  Furthermore, JUMBF lays the groundwork for a uniform approach to integrate tools satisfying the emerging requirements for privacy and security metadata.

To stay posted on JPEG 360, please regularly consult our website at jpeg.org and/or subscribe to the JPEG 360 e-mail reflector. 

 

HTJ2K

High Throughput JPEG 2000 (HTJ2K) aims to develop an alternate block-coding algorithm that can be used in place of the existing block coding algorithm specified in ISO/IEC 15444-1 (JPEG 2000 Part 1). The objective is to significantly increase the throughput of JPEG 2000, at the expense of a small reduction in coding efficiency, while allowing mathematically lossless transcoding to and from codestreams using the existing block coding algorithm.

As a result of a Call for Proposals issued at its 76th meeting, the JPEG Committee has selected a block-coding algorithm as the basis for Part 15 of the JPEG 2000 suite of standards, known as High Throughput JPEG 2000 (HTJ2K). The algorithm has demonstrated an average tenfold increase in encoding and decoding throughput, compared to the algorithms based on JPEG 2000 Part 1. This increase in throughput results in less than 15% average loss in coding efficiency, and allows mathematically lossless transcoding to and from JPEG 2000 Part 1 codestreams.

A Working Draft of Part 15 to the JPEG 2000 suite of standards is now under development.

 

JPEG Pleno

The JPEG Committee is currently pursuing three activities in the framework of the JPEG Pleno Standardization: Light Field, Point Cloud and Holographic content coding.

JPEG Pleno Light Field finished a third round of core experiments for assessing the impact of individual coding modules and started work on creating software for a verification model. Moreover, additional test data has been studied and approved for use in future core experiments. Working Draft documents for JPEG Pleno specifications Part 1 and Part 2 were updated. A JPEG Pleno Light Field AhG was established with mandates to create a common test conditions document; perform exploration studies on new datasets, quality metrics, and random-access performance indicators; and to update the working draft documents for Part 1 and Part 2.

Furthermore, use cases were studied and are under consideration for JPEG Pleno Point Cloud. A current draft list is under discussion for the next period and will be updated and mapped to the JPEG Pleno requirements. A final document on use cases and requirements for JPEG Pleno Point Cloud is expected at the next meeting.

JPEG Pleno Holography has reviewed the draft of a holography overview document. Moreover, the current databases were classified according to use cases, and plans to analyze numerical reconstruction tools were established.

 

JPEG XT

The JPEG Committee released two corrigenda to JPEG XT Part 1 (core coding system) and JPEG XT Part 8 (lossless extension JPEG-1). These corrigenda clarify the upsampling procedure for chroma-subsampled images by adopting the centered upsampling in use by JFIF.

 

JPEG Reference Software

The JPEG Committee is pleased to announce that the CD ballot for Reference Software has been issued for the original JPEG-1 standard. This initiative closes a long-standing gap in the legacy JPEG standard by providing two reference implementations for this widely used and popular image coding format.

Final Quote

The JPEG Committee is hopeful to see its recently launched Next Generation Image Coding, JPEG XL, can result in a format that will become as important for imaging products and services as its predecessor was; the widely used and popular legacy JPEG format which has been in service for a quarter of century. said Prof. Touradj Ebrahimi, the Convenor of the JPEG Committee.

About JPEG

The Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG) is a Working Group of ISO/IEC, the International Organisation for Standardization / International Electrotechnical Commission, (ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 29/WG 1) and of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU-T SG16), responsible for the popular JBIG, JPEG, JPEG 2000, JPEG XR, JPSearch and more recently, the JPEG XT, JPEG XS, JPEG Systems and JPEG Pleno families of imaging standards.

The JPEG Committee nominally meets four times a year, in different world locations. The 79th JPEG Meeting was held on 9-15 April 2018, in La Jolla, California, USA. The next 80th JPEG Meeting will be held on 7-13, July 2018, in Berlin, Germany.

More information about JPEG and its work is available at www.jpeg.org or by contacting Antonio Pinheiro or Frederik Temmermans (pr@jpeg.org) of the JPEG Communication Subgroup.

If you would like to stay posted on JPEG activities, please subscribe to the jpeg-news mailing list on http://jpeg-news-list.jpeg.org.  

 

Future JPEG meetings are planned as follows:JPEG-signature

  • No 80, Berlin, Germany, July 7 to13, 2018
  • No 81, Vancouver, Canada, October 13 to 19, 2018
  • No 82, Lisbon, Portugal, January 19 to 25, 2019

MPEG Column: 122nd MPEG Meeting in San Diego, CA, USA

The original blog post can be found at the Bitmovin Techblog and has been modified/updated here to focus on and highlight research aspects.

MPEG122 Plenary, San Diego, CA, USA.

MPEG122 Plenary, San Diego, CA, USA.

The MPEG press release comprises the following topics:

  • Versatile Video Coding (VVC) project starts strongly in the Joint Video Experts Team
  • MPEG issues Call for Proposals on Network-based Media Processing
  • MPEG finalizes 7th edition of MPEG-2 Systems Standard
  • MPEG enhances ISO Base Media File Format (ISOBMFF) with two new features
  • MPEG-G standards reach Draft International Standard for transport and compression technologies

Versatile Video Coding (VVC) – MPEG’ & VCEG’s new video coding project starts strong

The Joint Video Experts Team (JVET), a collaborative team formed by MPEG and ITU-T Study Group 16’s VCEG, commenced work on a new video coding standard referred to as Versatile Video Coding (VVC). The goal of VVC is to provide significant improvements in compression performance over the existing HEVC standard (i.e., typically twice as much as before) and to be completed in 2020. The main target applications and services include — but not limited to — 360-degree and high-dynamic-range (HDR) videos. In total, JVET evaluated responses from 32 organizations using formal subjective tests conducted by independent test labs. Interestingly, some proposals demonstrated compression efficiency gains of typically 40% or more when compared to using HEVC. Particular effectiveness was shown on ultra-high definition (UHD) video test material. Thus, we may expect compression efficiency gains well-beyond the targeted 50% for the final standard.

Research aspects: Compression tools and everything around it including its objective and subjective assessment. The main application area is clearly 360-degree and HDR. Watch out conferences like PCS and ICIP (later this year), which will be full of papers making references to VVC. Interestingly, VVC comes with a first draft, a test model for simulation experiments, and a technology benchmark set which is useful and important for any developments for both inside and outside MPEG as it allows for reproducibility.

MPEG issues Call for Proposals on Network-based Media Processing

This Call for Proposals (CfP) addresses advanced media processing technologies such as network stitching for VR service, super resolution for enhanced visual quality, transcoding, and viewport extraction for 360-degree video within the network environment that allows service providers and end users to describe media processing operations that are to be performed by the network. Therefore, the aim of network-based media processing (NBMP) is to allow end user devices to offload certain kinds of processing to the network. Therefore, NBMP describes the composition of network-based media processing services based on a set of media processing functions and makes them accessible through Application Programming Interfaces (APIs). Responses to the NBMP CfP will be evaluated on the weekend prior to the 123rd MPEG meeting in July 2018.

Research aspects: This project reminds me a lot about what has been done in the past in MPEG-21, specifically Digital Item Adaptation (DIA) and Digital Item Processing (DIP). The main difference is that MPEG targets APIs rather than pure metadata formats, which is a step forward into the right direction as APIs can be implemented and used right away. NBMP will be particularly interesting in the context of new networking approaches including, but not limited to, software-defined networking (SDN), information-centric networking (ICN), mobile edge computing (MEC), fog computing, and related aspects in the context of 5G.

7th edition of MPEG-2 Systems Standard and ISO Base Media File Format (ISOBMFF) with two new features

More than 20 years since its inception development of MPEG-2 systems technology (i.e., transport/program stream) continues. New features include support for: (i) JPEG 2000 video with 4K resolution and ultra-low latency, (ii) media orchestration related metadata, (iii) sample variance, and (iv) HEVC tiles.

The partial file format enables the description of an ISOBMFF file partially received over lossy communication channels. This format provides tools to describe reception data, the received data and document transmission information such as received or lost byte ranges and whether the corrupted/lost bytes are present in the file and repair information such as location of the source file, possible byte offsets in that source, byte stream position at which a parser can try processing a corrupted file. Depending on the communication channel, this information may be setup by the receiver or through out-of-band means.

ISOBMFF’s sample variants (2nd edition), which are typically used to provide forensic information in the rendered sample data that can, for example, identify the specific Digital Rights Management (DRM) client which has decrypted the content. This variant framework is intended to be fully compatible with MPEG’s Common Encryption (CENC) and agnostic to the particular forensic marking system used.

Research aspects: MPEG systems standards are mainly relevant for multimedia systems research with all its characteristics. The partial file format is specifically interesting as it targets scenarios with lossy communication channels.

MPEG-G standards reach Draft International Standard for transport and compression technologies

MPEG-G provides a set of standards enabling interoperability for applications and services dealing with high-throughput deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) sequencing. At its 122nd meeting, MPEG promoted its core set of MPEG-G specifications, i.e., transport and compression technologies, to Draft International Standard (DIS) stage. Such parts of the standard provide new transport technologies (ISO/IEC 23092-1) and compression technologies (ISO/IEC 23092-2) supporting rich functionality for the access and transport including streaming of genomic data by interoperable applications. Reference software (ISO/IEC 23092-4) and conformance (ISO/IEC 23092-5) will reach this stage in the next 12 months.

Research aspects: the main focus of this work item is compression and transport is still in its infancy. Therefore, research on the actual delivery for compressed DNA information as well as its processing is solicited.

What else happened at MPEG122?

  • Requirements is exploring new video coding tools dealing with low-complexity and process enhancements.
  • The activity around coded representation of neural networks has defined a set of vital use cases and is now calling for test data to be solicited until the next meeting.
  • The MP4 registration authority (MP4RA) has a new awesome web site http://mp4ra.org/.
  • MPEG-DASH is finally approving and working the 3rd edition comprising consolidated version of recent amendments and corrigenda.
  • CMAF started an exploration on multi-stream support, which could be relevant for tiled streaming and multi-channel audio.
  • OMAF kicked-off its activity towards a 2nd edition enabling support for 3DoF+ and social VR with the plan going to committee draft (CD) in Oct’18. Additionally, there’s a test framework proposed, which allows to assess performance of various CMAF tools. Its main focus is on video but MPEG’s audio subgroup has a similar framework to enable subjective testing. It could be interesting seeing these two frameworks combined in one way or the other.
  • MPEG-I architectures (yes plural) are becoming mature and I think this technical report will become available very soon. In terms of video, MPEG-I looks more closer at 3DoF+ defining common test conditions and a call for proposals (CfP) planned for MPEG123 in Ljubljana, Slovenia. Additionally, explorations for 6DoF and compression of dense representation of light fields are ongoing and have been started, respectively.
  • Finally, point cloud compression (PCC) is in its hot phase of core experiments for various coding tools resulting into updated versions of the test model and working draft.

Research aspects: In this section I would like to focus on DASH, CMAF, and OMAF. Multi-stream support, as mentioned above, is relevant for tiled streaming and multi-channel audio which has been recently studied in the literature and is also highly relevant for industry. The efficient storage and streaming of such kind of content within the file format is an important aspect and often underrepresented in both research and standardization. The goal here is to keep the overhead low while maximizing the utility of the format to enable certain functionalities. OMAF now targets the social VR use case, which has been discussed in the research literature for a while and, finally, makes its way into standardization. An important aspect here is both user and quality of experience, which requires intensive subjective testing.

Finally, on May 10 MPEG will celebrate 30 years as its first meeting dates back to 1988 in Ottawa, Canada with around 30 attendees. The 122nd meeting had more than 500 attendees and MPEG has around 20 active work items. A total of more than 170 standards have been produces (that’s approx. six standards per year) where some standards have up to nine editions like the HEVC standards. Overall, MPEG is responsible for more that 23% of all JTC 1 standards and some of them showing extraordinary longevity regarding extensions, e.g., MPEG-2 systems (24 years), MPEG-4 file format (19 years), and AVC (15 years). MPEG standards serve billions of users (e.g., MPEG-1 video, MP2, MP3, AAC, MPEG-2, AVC, ISOBMFF, DASH). Some — more precisely five — standards have receive Emmy awards in the past (MPEG-1, MPEG-2, AVC (2x), and HEVC).

Thus, happy birthday MPEG! In today’s society starts the high performance era with 30 years, basically the time of “compression”, i.e., we apply all what we learnt and live out everything, truly optimistic perspective for our generation X (millennials) standards body!

Opinion Column: Privacy and Multimedia

 

The discussion: multimedia data is affected by new forms of privacy threats, let’s learn, protect, and engage our users.

For this edition of the SIGMM Opinion Column, we carefully selected the discussion’s main topic, looking for an appealing and urgent problem arising for our community. Given the recent Cambridge Analytica’s scandal, and the upcoming enforcement of the General Data Protection Act in EU countries, we thought we should have a collective reflection on  ‘privacy and multimedia’.

The discussion: multimedia data is affected by new forms of privacy threats, let’s learn, protect, and engage our users.

Users share their data often unintentionally. One could indeed observe a diffuse sense of surprise and anger following the data leaks from Cambridge Analytica. As mentioned in a recent blog post from one of the participants, so far, large-scale data leaks have mainly affected private textual and social data of social media users. However, images and videos also contain private user information. There was a general consensus that it is time for our community to start thinking about how to protect private visual and multimedia data.

It was noted that computer vision technologies are now able to infer sensitive information from images (see, for example, a recent work on sexual orientation detection from social media profile pictures). However few technologies exist that defend users against automatic inference of private information from their visual data. We will need to design protection techniques to ensure users’ privacy protection for images as well, beyond simple face de-identification. We might also want users to engage and have fun with image privacy preserving tools, and this is the aim of the Pixel Privacy project.

But in multimedia, we go beyond image analysis. By nature, as multimedia researchers, we combine different sources of information to design better media retrieval or content serving technologies, or to ‘get more than the sum of parts’. While this is what makes our research so special, in the discussion participants noted that multimodal approaches might also generate new forms of privacy threats. Each individual source of data comes with its own privacy dimension, and we should be careful about the multiple privacy breaches we generate by analyzing each modality. At the same time, by combining different medias and their privacy dimensions, and performing massive inference on the global multimodal knowledge, we might also be generating new forms of threats to user privacy that individual stream don’t have.

Finally, we should also inform users about these new potential threats:  as experts who are doing ‘awesome cutting-edge work’, we also have a responsibility to make sure people know what the potential consequences are.

A note on the new format, the response rate, and a call for suggestions!

This quarter, we experimented with a new, slimmer format, hoping to reach out to more members of the community, beyond Facebook subscribers.

We extended the outreach beyond Facebook: we used the SIGMM Linkedin group for our discussion, and we directly contacted senior community members. To engage community members with limited time for long debates, we also lightened the format, asking anyone who is interested in giving us their opinion on the topic to send us or share with the group a one-liner reflecting their view on privacy on multimedia.

Despite the new format, we received a limited number of replies. We will keep trying new formats. Our aim is to generate fruitful  discussions, and gather opinions on crucial problems in a bottom-up fashion. We hope, edition after edition, to get better at giving voice to more and more members of the Multimedia Community.

We are happy to hear your thoughts on how to improve, so please reach out to us!

Multidisciplinary Community Spotlight: Assistive Augmentation

 

Emphasizing the importance of neighboring communities for our work in the field of multimedia was one of the primary objectives we set out with when we started this column about a year ago. In past issues, we gave related communities a voice through interviews and personal accounts. For instance, in the third issue of 2017, Cynthia shared personal insights from the International Society of Music Information Retrieval [4]. This issue continues the spotlight series.

Since its inception, I was involved with the Assistive Augmentation community—a multidisciplinary field that sits at the intersection of accessibility, assistive technologies, and human augmentation. In this issue, I briefly reflect on my personal experiences and research work within the community.

First, let me provide a high-level view on Assistive Augmentation and its general idea which is that of cross-domain assistive technology. Instead of putting sensorial capability in individual silos, the approach puts it on a continuum of usability for a specific technology. As an example, a reading aid for people with visual impairments enables access to printed text. At the same time, the reading aid can also be used by those with an unimpaired visual sense for other applications like language learning. In essence, the field is concerned with the design, development, and study of technology that substitutes, recovers, empowers or augments physical, sensorial or cognitive capabilities, depending on specific user needs (see Figure 1).

Assistive Augmentation Continuum

Figure 1.  Assistive Augmentation Continuum

Now let us take a step back. I joined the MIT Media Lab as a postdoctoral fellow in 2013 pursuing research on multi-sensory cueing for mobile interaction. With my background in user research and human-computer interaction, I was immediately attracted by an ongoing project at the lab lead by Roy Shilkrot, Suranga Nanayakkara and Pattie Maes, that involved studying how the MIT visually impaired and blind user group (VIBUG) uses assistive technology. People in that group are particularly tech-savvy. I came to know products like the ORCAM MyEye. It is priced at about 2500-4500 USD and aims at recognizing text, objects and so forth. Back in 2013 it had a large footprint and made its users really stand out. Our general observations were, to briefly summarize, that many tools we got to know during regular VIBUG meetings were highly specialized for this very target group. The latter is, of course, a good thing since it focuses directly on the actual end user. However, we also concluded that it locks the products in silos of usability defined by its’ end users’ sensorial capabilities. 

These anecdotal observations bring me back to the general idea of Assistive Augmentation. To explore this idea further, we proposed to hold a workshop at a conference, jointly with colleagues in neighboring communities. With ACM CHI attracting folks from different fields of research, we felt like it would be a good fit to test the waters and see whether we could get enough interest from different communities. Our proposal was successful: the workshop was held in 2014 and set the stage for thinking about, discussing and sketching out facets of Assistive Augmentation. As intended, our workshop attracted a very diverse crowd from different fields. Being able to discuss opportunities and the potential of Assistive Augmentation with such a group was immensely helpful and contributed significantly to our ongoing efforts to define the field. A practice I would encourage everyone at a similar stage to follow.

As a tangible outcome of this very workshop, our community decided to pursue a jointly edited volume which Springer published earlier this year [3]. The book illustrates two main areas of Assistive Augmentation by example: (i) sensory enhancement and substitution and (ii) design for Assistive Augmentation. Peers contributed comprehensive reports on case studies which serve as lighthouse projects to exemplify Assistive Augmentation research practice. Besides, the book features field-defining articles that introduce each of the two main areas.

Many relevant areas have yet to be touched upon, for instance, ethical issues, quality of augmentations and their appropriations. Augmenting human perception, another important research thrust, has recently been discussed in both SIGCHI and SIGMM communities. Last year, a workshop on “Amplification and Augmentation of Human Perception” was held by Albrecht Schmidt, Stefan Schneegass, Kai Kunze, Jun Rekimoto and Woontack Woo at ACM CHI [5]. Also, one of last year’s keynotes at ACM Multimedia focused on “Enhancing and Augmenting Human Perception with Artificial Intelligence” by Achin Bhowmik [1]. These ongoing discussions in academic communities underline the importance of investigating, shaping and defining the intersection of assistive technologies and human augmentations. Academic research is one avenue that must be pursued, with work being disseminated at dedicated conference series such as Augmented Human [6]. Other avenues that highlight and demonstrate the potential of Assistive Augmentation technology include for instance sports, as discussed within the Superhuman Sports Society [7]. Most recently, the Cybathlon was held for the very first time in 2016. Athletes with “disabilities or physical weakness use advanced assistive devices […] to compete against each other” [8].

Looking back at how the community came about, I conclude that organizing a workshop at a large academic venue like CHI was an excellent first step for establishing the community. In fact, the workshop created a fantastic momentum within the community. However, focusing entirely on a jointly edited volume as the main tangible outcome of the workshop had several drawbacks. In retrospect, the publication timeline was far too long, rendering it impossible to capture the dynamics of an emerging field. But indeed, this cannot be the objective of a book publication—this should have been the objective of follow-up workshops in neighboring communities (e.g., at ACM Multimedia) or special issues in a journal with a much shorter turn-around. With our book project now being concluded, we aim to pick up on past momenta with a forthcoming special issue on Assistive Augmentation in MDPI’s Multimodal Technologies and Interaction journal. I am eagerly looking forward to what is next and to our communities’ joint work across disciplines towards pushing our physical, sensorial and cognitive abilities.

References

[1]       Achin Bhowmik. 2017. Enhancing and Augmenting Human Perception with Artificial Intelligence Technologies. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM on Multimedia Conference(MM ’17), 136–136.

[2]       Ellen Yi-Luen Do. 2018. Design for Assistive Augmentation—Mind, Might and Magic. In Assistive Augmentation. Springer, 99–116.

[3]       Jochen Huber, Roy Shilkrot, Pattie Maes, and Suranga Nanayakkara (Eds.). 2018. Assistive Augmentation. Springer Singapore.

[4]       Cynthia Liem. 2018. Multidisciplinary column: inclusion at conferences, my ISMIR experiences. ACM SIGMultimedia Records9, 3 (2018), 6.

[5]       Albrecht Schmidt, Stefan Schneegass, Kai Kunze, Jun Rekimoto, and Woontack Woo. 2017. Workshop on Amplification and Augmentation of Human Perception. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 668–673.

[6]       Augmented Human Conference Series. Retrieved June 1, 2018 from http://www.augmented-human.com/

[7]       Superhuman Sports Society. Retrieved June 1, 2018 from http://superhuman-sports.org/

[8]       Cybathlon. Cybathlon – moving people and technology. Retrieved June 1, 2018 from http://www.cybathlon.ethz.ch/

 


About the Column

The Multidisciplinary Column is edited by Cynthia C. S. Liem and Jochen Huber. Every other edition, we will feature an interview with a researcher performing multidisciplinary work, or a column of our own hand. For this edition, we feature a column by Jochen Huber.

Editor Biographies

Cynthia_Liem_2017Dr. Cynthia C. S. Liem is an Assistant Professor in the Multimedia Computing Group of Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands, and pianist of the Magma Duo. She initiated and co-coordinated the European research project PHENICX (2013-2016), focusing on technological enrichment of symphonic concert recordings with partners such as the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra. Her research interests consider music and multimedia search and recommendation, and increasingly shift towards making people discover new interests and content which would not trivially be retrieved. Beyond her academic activities, Cynthia gained industrial experience at Bell Labs Netherlands, Philips Research and Google. She was a recipient of the Lucent Global Science and Google Anita Borg Europe Memorial scholarships, the Google European Doctoral Fellowship 2010 in Multimedia, and a finalist of the New Scientist Science Talent Award 2016 for young scientists committed to public outreach.

 

jochen_huberDr. Jochen Huber is a Senior User Experience Researcher at Synaptics. Previously, he was an SUTD-MIT postdoctoral fellow in the Fluid Interfaces Group at MIT Media Lab and the Augmented Human Lab at Singapore University of Technology and Design. He holds a Ph.D. in Computer Science and degrees in both Mathematics (Dipl.-Math.) and Computer Science (Dipl.-Inform.), all from Technische Universität Darmstadt, Germany. Jochen’s work is situated at the intersection of Human-Computer Interaction and Human Augmentation. He designs, implements and studies novel input technology in the areas of mobile, tangible & non-visual interaction, automotive UX and assistive augmentation. He has co-authored over 60 academic publications and regularly serves as program committee member in premier HCI and multimedia conferences. He was program co-chair of ACM TVX 2016 and Augmented Human 2015 and chaired tracks of ACM Multimedia, ACM Creativity and Cognition and ACM International Conference on Interface Surfaces and Spaces, as well as numerous workshops at ACM CHI and IUI. Further information can be found on his personal homepage: http://jochenhuber.com

 

Sharing and Reproducibility in ACM SIGMM

 

This column discusses the efforts of ACM SIGMM towards sharing and reproducibility. Apart from the specific sessions dedicated to open source and datasets, ACM Multimedia Systems started to provide official ACM badges for articles that make artifacts available since last year. This year, it has marked a record with 45% of the articles acquiring such a badge.


Without data it is impossible to put theories to the test. Moreover, without running code it is tedious at best to (re)produce and evaluate any results. Yet collecting data and writing code can be a road full of pitfalls, ranging from datasets containing copyrighted materials to algorithms containing bugs. The ideal datasets and software packages are those that are open and transparent for the world to look at, inspect, and use without or with limited restrictions. Such “artifacts” make it possible to establish public consensus on their correctness or otherwise to start a dialogue on how to fix any identified problems.

In our interconnected world, storing and sharing information has never been easier. Despite the temptation for researchers to keep datasets and software to themselves, a growing number are willing to share their resources with others. To further promote this sharing behavior, conferences, workshops, publishers, non-profit and even for-profit companies are increasingly recognizing and supporting these efforts. For example, the ACM Multimedia conference has hosted an open source software competition since 2004, and the ACM Multimedia Systems conference has included an open datasets and software track since 2011 . The ACM Digital Library now also hands out badges to public artifacts that have been made available and optionally reviewed and verified by members of the community. At the same time, organizations such as Zenodo and Amazon host open datasets for free. Sharing ultimately pays off: the citation statistics for ACM Multimedia Systems conferences over the past five years, for example, show that half of the 20 most cited papers shared data and code although they have represented a small fraction of the published papers so far.

graphic datasets

Good practices are increasingly adopted. In this year’s edition of the ACM Multimedia Systems conference, 69 works (papers, demos, datasets, software) were accepted, out of which 31 (45%) were awarded an ACM badge. This is a large increase compared to last year, when out of 42 works only a total of 13 (31%) received one. This greatly expands one of the core objectives of both the conference and SIGMM towards open science. At this moment, the ACM Digital Library does not separately index which papers received a badge, making it challenging to find all papers who have one. It further appears not many other ACM conferences are aware of the badges yet; for example, while ACM Multimedia accepted 16 open source papers in 2016 and 6 papers in 2017, none applied for a badge. This year at ACM Multimedia Systems only “artifacts available” badges have been awarded. For next year our intention is to ensure all dataset and software submissions receive the “artifacts evaluated” badge. This would require several committed community members to spend time working with the authors to get the artifacts running on all major platforms with corresponding detailed documentation.

The accepted artifacts this year are diverse in nature: several submissions focus on releasing artifacts related to quality of experience of (mobile/wireless) streaming video, while others center on making datasets and tools related to images, videos, speech, sensors, and events available; in addition, there are a number of contributions in the medical domain. It is great to see such a range of interests in our community!