Transcript Recent Advances in ViPER David Mihalcik Jonathan Shneier David Doermann Work in Progress   Improved SE processes.

Recent Advances in ViPER
David Mihalcik
Jonathan Shneier
David Doermann
Work in Progress


Improved SE processes. (Web site, SourceForge, etc.).
Rewriting the GT modules using the API.
–
–
–
–

Allows for more freedom in individual modules.
Undo/redo support.
API has interface for editing viper data schema.
Already have non-editable timeline and canvas views.
Enhancing PE to support:
–
–
ROC curve drawing.
Enhancing “don’t care” functionality to support “really care”
rules. Perhaps generalize to a computed “care” factor.
Current Hazy Plans

Enhancing API to support:
–
–
–
–
Plain text search.
Relations.
Generated attributes.
Inheritance? Possibly ontology integration:


OWL or RDFS – see paper on using description logics to enhance
multimedia libraries.
Multi-level evaluation of activities. Would like to
integrate:
–
–
–
Object-level evaluation.
Action-level evaluation.
Higher-level evaluation.
Process Improvement

SourceForge web site:
–

http://viper-toolkit.sf.net/
Actively maintaining list of requirements and
goals.
Timeline View


Based on Jon Heggland’s OntoLog.
Other existing tools include timeline editors in
video/sound/multimedia editing tools, Plaisant’s
LifeLines, etc.
OntoLog
Current Timeline
Lvalues
- Background
+ Indoors
+ Cityscape
+ Outdoors
Objects
- Objects
+ Faces
+ People
+ Text
Need for Ontology Integration

Support for relations.
–
–
–

This event is composed of these activities.
These people participated in these activities.
More generally, this object is related to these other
objects.
Support for inheritance.
–
This object type represents a subset of all objects in
this type, e.g. ‘arrive’ is a subclass of ‘move’.
Ontology Integration


Using simple description logics, probably getting a third
generation, non-compatible ViPER data format in the
process.
OWL – the W3C’s web ontology language, is a layer on
top of RDF (what OntoLog uses) to support DL
reasoning.
–
–
–
Using n3, would look somewhat similar to old format, if a little
more difficult to understand the header or parse without an n3
parser.
Using XML, would be even more verbose than new format.
Grew from DAML, so there are already a variety of tools
developed at UMCP.
Example of Possible Data Format
owl:Ontology rdf:about <> ; owl:imports <owl> ; owl:imports <viper> .
:FileInformation rdfs:subClassOf viper:FileDescriptor .
:named a owl:ObjectProperty ; rdfs:subPropertyOf viper:hasAttribute ;
rdfs:label "has file name of" ; rdfs:range :FileInformation ; rdfs:domain.
<a.mpg> a viper:Sourcefile ;
viper:hasFileDescriptor [
a :FileInformation ;
:named [ a :svalue ;
:hasValue “a.mpg” ] ] .
Activity and Event Evaluation

At the most simple, do signal detection type
evaluation, allowing ROC analysis.
–
–
For near misses, can do some sort of windowed
approach.
Using partial order of activities, can evaluate at
different levels of meaning.


Important event -> people event -> steal book.
However, activities can be complex, and may
want to evaluate them at multiple levels.
Activity Decomposition


Regard each event as an aggregation of
smaller activities.
Check how well it segmented the activities:
–
–
For each event, compare all related
objects/activities.
Get back a score for each event.