Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byAnika Pevey Modified over 3 years ago
1
1 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Collaborative Visualization: A Review and Taxonomy Dr. Ian J. Grimstead Prof. Nick J. Avis Prof. David W. Walker Cardiff School of Computer Science Cardiff, Wales, UK
2
2 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Presentation Structure ● Taxonomy: selection of grouping ● Selection of attribute for comparison ● Analysis: Polar plot ● Closer analysis: Scatter plot ● Advances in technology over time ● Conclusion.
3
3 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Taxonomy: Five Types of System 1. Collaborative problem solving environments ● Component-based workflow, middleware 2. Virtual-Reality environments ● Collaborative (CVR) or Multi-User (MVR) 3. Multi-player online games ● Wide range of systems, network, etc. ● Paying users – trust issues 4. Multi-user enabling of single-user app ● Single machine, security issues 5. “Other systems” ● Digital lab books, meeting support, data visualization ● More specialist in nature.
4
4 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Five Types of System (cont) ● Why this grouping? Other possibilities: ● Real-time interaction systems ● Trusted systems ● Aim: ● To note differences between application areas ● Any missed approaches / opportunities? ● Hence grouped by application area ● Rather than by major attribute (e.g. trust).
5
5 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Attribute Comparison: Selection of Attributes ● What attributes are there? Examples: ● Number of simultaneous users ● Bandwidth requirements ● Are they easy to measure/quantify? ● Bandwidth requirement? ● Need detailed information ● Need attributes we can measure/estimate ● May not be possible to install s/w locally ● e.g. private research s/w ● Must evaluate offline / from published work.
6
6 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Selected Attributes 1. Number of simultaneous users ● 1, 10, 100… 2. User access control ● Global lock, lock per object, no locking 3. Communication architecture ● Single server, multiple servers, peer-to-peer 4. Type of transmitted data ● Screen, graphical data, raw program data 5. User synchronization ● Lock step, loose, asynchronous.
7
7 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Attribute Determination ● Problem: ● User access control is often undefined ● “Guesstimate” added ● Not reliable enough for analysis ● Hence user access control is skipped ● Remaining 4 attributes? ● Sufficient information for guesstimates.
8
8 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Polar Plot for System Comparison ● Ratings mapped to range 1-3 ● e.g. 10, 100, 1000+ users mapped to 1,2,3 ● Application groups averaged ● Mapped to 0°, 90°, 180°, 270° ● Application areas represented by a quad ● Higher values imply more scalability ● Most scalable: largest quad ● Should reveal trends.
9
9 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Polar Plot: Average Attributes Any patterns?
10
10 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Polar Plot: Scalability ● PSE, MUE, Other ● Least scalable ● Bottleneck: ● Single machine (MUE) ● Central control (PSE) ● MUE skewed ● SameTime (1,000 users) ● Other ● Restricted by design.
11
11 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Polar Plot: Scalability (cont) ● Most scalable systems: ● Multi-server ● Not peer-to-peer ● Servers under direct administration control ● Preferred to P2P? ● Peer to peer: ● Still being tried ● Now a dirty word? ● KaZZa ● Firewall issues ● Off-campus traffic.
12
12 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Improvements: Scalability/Resilience ● Scalability: ● Systems need to be redesigned to cope ● Convert to peer-to-peer / multi-server ● Difficult to retrospectively engineer ● Integrated audio/video conferencing ● Enable more control over bandwidth ● Resilience ● Multiple peers/servers recording to disk ● Geographically distributed – reduce failure.
13
13 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Polar Plot: Asynchronous ● Asynchronous: ● Increased response time ● Increased #users ● Assume more users with async ● Not reflected in plot ● More complex to impl ● Easier: traffic reduction techniques.
14
14 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Improvements: Asynchronous ● Support of asynchronous behaviour ● Reduce requirement on high-speed network ● Few systems are truly asynch ● Mainly data/meeting recording systems ● Enables interaction with recordings ● Reduces need to meet in the same timezone ● CSpray – recorded actions replayed ● Can then be amended by others.
15
15 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Attribute Analysis ● User synchronization – mainly loose ● Possibly due to incorrect estimates ● Or insufficient published information ● Concentrate on 3 remaining attributes ● Number of users ● Communication architecture ● Access control ● Positions jittered – random offset ● Reflect inaccuracies / guesstimate ● Reveals all datapoints.
16
16 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Attribute Analysis: Scatter Plot 20 systems presented. Any patterns?
17
17 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Attribute Analysis: Scatter Plot ● Per session locking: ● Useable with <10 users ● Easy to implement ● >100 users ● Per object or none ● Per object locking: ● Reduce traffic with world partitioning? ● Localised lock/traffic ● Global lock trickier with >10 users.
18
18 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Advances in Technology Over Time ● To investigate changes in technology: ● # simultaneous users vs. publication date ● Changes from 1996 – 2004: ● Increased network capacity ● Decreased latency ● Increased computer power ● Any effect on published systems?
19
19 IEEE DS-RT 2005 History of Simultaneous Users No discernable trend; probably small user base, so no advantage in supporting 1,000’s of users Unusual: 20,000 users Butterfly.net online game server support Over time, new h/w and s/w taken advantage of, old ideas reused e.g. network locales: Community Place (1997) COVEN (1999) Butterfly.net (2003) No major paradigm shift.
20
20 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Improvements: Grid Technology ● Grid technology is here – any use? ● Maturing slowly ● Enables “middleware” to be created ● Grid toolkits manage system housekeeping ● Useful for multi-server approaches (Butterfly.net) ● Still using XML for messaging! (text-based) ● Keep it in mind ● Once standards stabilise ● Or help create them now ● Tuesday’s panel ● Distributed simulations and the Grid.
21
21 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Improvements: Perhaps a Hybrid Approach? ● Peer to peer behind local firewall ● Machines are under moderate control ● Local traffic distributed ● Client-server across firewall ● Trusted peers acts as gateways ● Tightly controlled to support security ● Sys admins can regulate traffic ● Only updates sent to “gateway” reach external network.
22
22 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Improvements: System Interaction ● System interaction ● Many different systems… ● …can they interoperate? ● No! Well, as far as we can tell… ● DIS, HLA – expensive to obtain IEEE standards ● Need for open message format? ● Enable legacy applications latest apps ● Bigger question perhaps: ● Do we wish them to?
23
23 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Conclusion ● Caveat empor: ● Imperfect science - very high-level overview ● Useful taxonomy ● Thinking of a new system? Compare with previous… ● Scalability of VR,MPOGs > MUE,PSE ● Must consider scalability at design stage ● Otherwise bottlenecks appear ● No trend to high-end scalability ● Lack of market / requirement / drive? ● Or awaiting a new solution?
24
24 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Questions? ● And, possibly, some answers… I.J.Grimstead@cs.cardiff.ac.uk
25
25 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Appendix ● Or slide graveyard…
26
26 IEEE DS-RT 2005 1. Collaborative Problem Solving Environments (PSEs) ● Compared to generic problem solving environments: ● Such as Mathematica, Iris Explorer ● No inbuilt support for user collaboration ● Collaborative systems: ● COVISA, cAVS: component-based workflow ● ICENI, CUMULVS: middleware.
27
27 IEEE DS-RT 2005 2. Virtual Reality Environments ● Two sub-types: ● Collaborative VR environments (CVR) ● Multi-user VR environments (MUVR) ● Difference: support for user interaction / sharing of objects / etc. ● Examples: ● CVD, SCAPE: fully immersive ● DIVE, COVEN: >100 users.
28
28 IEEE DS-RT 2005 3. Multi-Player Online Games (MPOG) ● Share many facets with VR ● Real-time response ● Multi-user, scalable ● Must cope with a wide range of: ● Network bandwidth (modem / ADSL / LAN) ● Systems (bottom range PC / high end gamer) ● Security (trusted servers, untrusted players) ● Various techniques used ● Interpolate past data (Tribes) cpw. dead-reckoning ● Distribute object maintenance (Quazal’s Net-Z).
29
29 IEEE DS-RT 2005 4. Multi-User Enabling of Single-User Applications (MUE) ● Distributes a single-user program ● On a single machine ● One user can control at any one time ● Can support many viewers (Sametime: 1,000) ● Pre-existing applications enabled ● No assumptions can be made ● Hardware graphics supported (VizServer) ● Security issues ● Someone’s PC is being opened up.
30
30 IEEE DS-RT 2005 5. Other Systems ● Insufficient room in paper for this ● These systems are very varied ● Follow no particular pattern ● Often for an unusual/specific purpose ● Samples sub-grouped as: ● Digital lab books (DARWIN, DOE2000) ● Data visualization tools (CSpray, NOVA) ● Meeting support (CoAKTinG, Office o/t Future).
31
31 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Collaborative PSEs: Defining Attributes ● Defining attributes: ● Users often assume trust ● Scientists can’t collaborate without this! ● Not designed for large groups ● <10 simultaneous users ● Do not require immediate response.
32
32 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Virtual Reality Environments: Defining Attributes ● Immersive environments ● Small number of users ● Specialist platforms ● Non-immersive ● Wide range of number of supported users ● 1000 ● Object locking for collaborative VR ● Real-time interaction ● Variety of technologies to load balance ● Peer-to-peer, multi-server, etc. ● Automated re-distribution of load.
33
33 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Multi-Player Online Games: Defining Attributes ● No trust assumed ● Must scale ● Wide range of hardware supported ● Butterfly.net – 20,000 users ● Real-time interaction ● Ignoring turn-based games, e.g. chess ● Tools to support this ● High-level instructions sent not low-level moves (Age of Empires) ● Interpolate past positions (Half-Life).
34
34 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Multi-User Enabling: Defining Attributes ● Security often provided ● Bottlenecks on single host ● Except when this is broadcast read-only ● Often sends using video compression ● Cannot determine application’s requirements ● Hence send raw video data.
35
35 IEEE DS-RT 2005 Summary of Analysis ● Caveat empor: ● Imperfect science - very high-level overview ● Useful taxonomy ● Searching for a system? ● …with N simultaneous users, multi-server? ● No major trend over time ● Scalability: ● Asynchronous support rare ● Low-level, detailed data (high volume) often sent ● Cpw. high-level, minimal detail (low volume) ● Multiple servers popular ● Main factor: ease of implementation.
Similar presentations
© 2018 SlidePlayer.com Inc.
All rights reserved.
Ppt on smoking is injurious to health Ppt on job rotation examples Ppt on power generation using footsteps in the dark Ppt on global warming in india Ppt on real numbers for class 9th maths Ppt on cloud computing projects Ppt on cdma and bluetooth technology Ppt on private labels in india Ppt on internet information services Ppt on going concern concept