ITR Panel Summary and Reviews (9/02) Proposal: "Webcast and Distributed Collaboration Control Automation" PI's: Rowe PANEL SUMMARY (NOT COMPETITIVE) --------------- The PI proposes to automate many decision making functions and artistic decsions without presenting some kind of artificial intelligence or fuzzy logic model. The proposal essentially relies on current technology and lacks in fundamental research issues. The major software component is development of a script language for collaboration and directorial control, but fundamental research issues are not being addressed. Another panelist pointed out that development of the production scripting language may not be as crucial as a "library" for that language. The panel agrees that the proposal is fairly well written and well structured with all the research agendas well outlined. The fact that the project will produce useful software tools is also highly commandable. However, the panel thinks the proposal may not fit well into the scope of the ITR program, and encourages the PI to consider submitting the proposal to the NSF strategic technology for the Internet program (or a similar program). The panel agrees to put the proposal in the non-competitive category. --------------------------------------- REVIEW 1 (GOOD) ---------------- What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? The work is well defined, and it is essentially a system development proposal. One problem is that it may be the case that the scope of the proposal is too narrow. The primary software component seems to be the development of a script language for collaboration and directorial control, but it is not clear that any fundamental issues are being addressed here. For instance, in a peer-to-peer environment, it seems likely that a users, or their software agents will want to dynamically modify floor control, streaming options, etc. This does not seem to be part of the research. Another key point would seem to be partial reuse and the development of templates for activities like undergrad class, seminar, conference lecture, panel review etc. An important issue is camera positioning, and the PI identifies the need to figure out what should be tracked, when in should be enabled, etc. This presumably needs to be done via experimentation, but that part of the plan is vaguely specified. Another question is how much more actual work needs to be done in scripting for collaboration environments? Between SMIL2, NSYNCH, and the multitude of XML-based languages many of the primitives, actions and syntax seem available and understood. It also seems that the proposed work is closely tied to AG, which is an emerging standard, but the results here may not translate to other systems. What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity? The development of newer and better collaboration control tools is of great benefit for the educational and research community, and the approach here is a continuation of a broad class of Internet-friendly tools. The PI can no doubt deliver here. Summary Statement A nice idea if not perhaps too focused on tool building without consideration of the larger issues. -------------------------------- REVIEW 2 (VERY GOOD) ---------------- What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? Interesting and useful technology. My only criticism is that I think the development of the production scripting language is not as crucial as a "library" for that language. What I mean is that the scripting language itself seems to be equivalent to many other languages developed in the areas of coordination, workflow, and software process. What I see as a critical piece of infrastructure would be a "library" of "templates" for productions. Unfortunately, I'm not an expert in the field, but the proposal is well written and convincing. In particular, I like the practical validation approach, for which the PI seems to have a very strong plan. What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity? If successful, the proposed research would have a direct positive impact on education and research, in the sense that it would provide a tool to facilitate distance learning and collaborative research among geographically distributed research groups. Summary Statement I don't know very much about production of webcast events, but I can definitely see good motivations for the proposed work, and I can also see the specific innovations outlined in the proposal. I like the practical approach. Overall, I think the proposal is convincing. -------------------------------- REVIEW 3 (FAIR) ---------------- What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? Medium low. Many of the aspects of webcast seem to be automation of many decision making functions and artistic decisions such as camera angles that would be difficult to automate without some kind of artificial intelligence or electronic modeling of the director"s decision making function. More of an evolutionary improvements in conferencing using current technology rather than developing and advancing new technology. What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity? Medium. Reasonably small community of webcast for conferencing and classes. The technology is useful and necessary for videoconferencing but no applications are mentioned outside this function. Summary Statement A fair proposal but perhaps some additional information about automated decision making functions is needed. -------------------------------- REVIEW 4 (VERY GOOD/GOOD) ---------------- What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? The PIs propose to develop software to automate the tasks usually performed by a producer/director in lecture webcasts. There are two major focuses: (1) the PIs will improve a virtual director system (that provides a broadcast automation service and a question monitor service) in three directions; (ii) the PIs will automate AG videoconference control including automating layout of windows on the projection screen, producing a stream of director's commands, and exploring new models of interaction. The proposal is fairly well written and well structured with all the research agendas well outlined. The PI has been working in the area for quite some times and has had software prototypes up and running. In contrast to most of the other proposals that may lead to a few journal publication, this is a proposal that will produce operational software. The major problem is that the proposed research is essentially implementation-oriented, and may not contain enough fundamental research. It also contains little networking components, and should be reviewed by software and programming language people. The proposal may be better suited for the NSF strategy plan for Internet technology program. What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity? The proposed research, if successfully carried out, will definitely make an impact to internet streaming media. The plan to integrate research into education is strong. Summary Statement --------------------------------