Advertisement

Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 51, Issue 2, pp 525–553 | Cite as

Innovative directions in self-organized distributed multimedia systems

  • Laszlo Böszörmenyi
  • Manfred del Fabro
  • Marian Kogler
  • Mathias Lux
  • Oge Marques
  • Anita Sobe
Article

Abstract

The way by which multimedia contents are produced, delivered across networks, and consumed by intended users have shifted significantly during the past 10 years. In this paper we postulate that, in the near future, flexible and self-organizing facilities will play a dominating role in distributed multimedia systems. We discuss how such systems can be designed, using a three-layer (sensor, distribution, and user layer) architecture, SOMA (Self Organizing Multimedia Architecture), as an example. We also present innovative directions in three main aspects of self-organized multimedia systems: (i) the self-organizing aspects of multimedia user communities, e.g., the wisdom, intentions, and needs of users; (ii) a fresh look at video streams that treat them as a collection of units that can be composed taking user and network aspects into account; and (iii) new delivery paradigms and how self-organization and multimedia delivery can be combined.

Keywords

Distributed multimedia systems Self-organized multimedia applications Video delivery Video streaming User experience Social multimedia systems 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The SOMA project has been funded by the Lakeside Labs Research and Technology Center, Klagenfurt and by the Klagenfurt University, Austria. Further thanks go to Wilfried Elmenreich, Christoph Kofler, Arthur Pitman, Felix Pletzer, Bernhard Rinner, Klaus Schöffmann, Markus Strohmaier, Roland Tusch and Stefan Wieser for their ongoing work on the topic and their help.

References

  1. 1.
    Androutsellis-Theotokis S, Spinellis D (2004) A survey of peer-to-peer content distribution technologies. ACM Comput Surv 36(4):335–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Babaoglu O, Montresor A, Urnes T, Canright G, Deutsch A, Caro GAD, Ducatelle F, Gambardella LM, Ganguly N, Jelasity M, Montemanni R (2006) Design patterns from biology for distributed computing. ACM Trans Auton Adaptive Syst 1(1):26–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brinkschulte U, Pacher M, von Renteln A (2007) Towards an artificial hormone system for self-organizing real-time task allocation. In: Lecture notes in computer science, pp 339–347Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Broder A (2002) A taxonomy of web search. SIGIR Forum 36(2):3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Capovilla N, Eberhard M, Mignanti S, Petrocco R, Vehkaperä J (2010) An architecture for distributing scalable content over peer-to-peer networks, Proceedings of the second international conference on multimedia (MMEDIA)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cattuto C, Schmitz C, Baldassarri A, ServedioVDP, Loreto V, Hotho A, Grahl M, Stumme G (2007) Network properties of folksonomies, AI Communications Special Issue on “Network Analysis in Natural Sciences and Engineering”Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Choe YR, Schuff DL, Dyaberi JM, Pai VS (2007) Improving VoD server efficiency with bittorrent. In: MULTIMEDIA '07: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Multimedia, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 117–126Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cohen B (2008) BEP0003 - The BitTorrent Protocol Specification; URL: http://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0003.html; accessed 07/10
  9. 9.
    Datta R, Joshi D, Li J, Wang JZ (2008) Image retrieval: ideas, influences, and trends of the new age. ACM Comput Surv 40(2):1–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elmenreich W, de Meer H (2008) Self-organizing networked systems for technical applications: a discussion on open issues. In: Hummel KA, Sterbenz JPG (eds) Self-organizing systems, Third International Workshop, IWSOS 2008, Vienna, Austria, December 10–12, 2008. Proceedings, Springer, pp. 1–9Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Elmenreich W, Souza RD, Bettstetter C, de Meer H (2009) A survey of models and design methods for self-organizing networked systems. In: Spyropoulos T, Hummel KA (eds) Self-organizing systems, 4th IFIP TC 6 International Workshop, IWSOS 2009, Zurich, Switzerland, December 9–11, 2009. Proceedings, Springer, pp. 37–49Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gemert JC, Geusebroek J-M, Veenman CJ, Smeulders AW (2008) Kernel codebooks for scene categorization. In: ECCV ‘08: Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, Berlin, pp 696–709Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gershenson C, Heylighen F (2003) When can we call a system self-organizing? In: Advances in artificial life, Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, pp. 606–614Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Herrmann K (2007) Self-organizing replica placement - a case study on emergence, First International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO 2007)(Saso), pp 13–22Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Heylighen F, Kiel LD (eds) (2003) The science of self-organization and adaptivity, Eolss Publishers, chapter 7, pp. 184–211Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heylighen F, Gershenson C (2003) The meaning of self-organization in computing. IEEE Intell Syst 18(4):72–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hotho A, Jäschke R, Schmitz C, Stumme G (2006) Information retrieval in folksonomies: search and ranking. In: Proceedings of the 3rd European Semantic Web Conference. Springer, Budva, Montenegro, pp 411–426Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jain AK, Murty MN, Flynn PJ (1999) Data clustering: a review. ACM Comput Surv 31(3):264–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jansen BJ, Booth DL, Spink A (2007) Determining the user intent of web search engine queries. In: WWW ‘07: Proceedings of the 16th international conference on World Wide Web. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 1149–1150Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jiang Y-G, Ngo C-W, Yang J (2007) Towards optimal bag-of-features for object categorization and semantic video retrieval. In: CIVR '07: Proceedings of the 6th ACM International Conference on Image and Video Retrieval, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 494–501Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khan S, Schollmeier R, Steinbach E (2004) A performance comparison of multiple description video streaming in peer-to-peer and content delivery networks. In: ICME'2004 IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, IEEE, Taipei, Taiwan, pp. 503–506Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kofler C, Lux M (2009a) Dynamic presentation adaptation based on user intent classification. In: MM ‘09: Proceedings of the seventeen ACM international conference on Multimedia, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 1117–1118Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kofler C, Lux M (2009) An exploratory study on the explicitness of user intentions in digital photo retrieval. In: I-KNOW '09: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Technologies, pp. 208–214Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kogler M, Lux M (2010) Bag of visual words revisited—an exploratory study onrobust image retrieval exploiting fuzzy codebooks. In: Proceedings of KDD2010 (to appear)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Li X, Wang Y-Y, Acero A (2008) Learning query intent from regularized click graphs. In: SIGIR ‘08: Proceedings of the 31st annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research and development in information retrieval. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 339–346Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li X, Snoek CGM, Worring M (2009) Annotating images by harnessing worldwide user-tagged photos. In: ICASSP ‘09: Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, pp 3717–3720Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lux M, Granitzer M, Kern R (2007) Aspects of broad folksonomies. In: 4th Int. Workshop on Text Information Retrieval TIR-07, IEEE, Regensburg, Germany, pp. 283–287Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lux M, Marques O, Pitman A (2008) Using visual features to improve tag suggestions in image sharing sites. In: International Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition from the Social Web (KASW’08)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lux M, Kogler M, del Fabro M (2010) Why did you take this photo? A study on user intentions in digital photo productions. In: International Workshop on Social, Adaptive and Personalized Multimedia Interaction and AccessGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lux M, Kofler C, Marques O (2010) A classification scheme for user intentions in image search. In: Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2010, Atlanta, GA, USAGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lux M, Marques O, Schöffmann K, Böszörmenyi L, Lajtai G (2010) A novel tool for summarization of arthroscopic videos. Multimed Tools Appl 46(2):521–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Makadia A, Pavlovic V, Kumar S (2008) A new baseline for image annotation. In: ECCV ‘08: Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 316–329Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mamei M, Menezes R, Tolksdorf R, Zambonelli F (2006) Case studies for self-organization in computer science. J Syst Arch 52(8–9):443–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Padmanabhan VN, Wang HJ, Chou PA, Sripanidkulchai K (2002) Distributing streaming media content using cooperative networking. In: NOSSDAV '02: Proceedings of the 12th international workshop on network and operating systems support for digital audio and video, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 177–186Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pletzer F, Rinner B (2010) Distributed task allocation for visual sensor networks: a market-based approach. In: SEISMYC'2010: Workshop on Socio-Economics Inspiring Self-Managed Systems and Concepts at the 4th International Conference on Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems (SASO'10), Budapest, HungaryGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Prehofer C, Bettstetter C (2005) Self-organization in communication networks: principles and design paradigms. IEEE Commun Mag 43(7):78–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rose DE, Levinson D (2004) Understanding user goals in web search. In: WWW ‘04: Proceedings of the 13th international conference on World Wide Web. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 13–19Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Snoek CGM, van de Sande KEA, de Rooij O, Huurnink B, van Gemert J, Uijlings JRR, He J, Li X, Everts I, Nedovic V, van Liempt M, van Balen R, de Rijke M, Geusebroek J-M, Gevers T, Worring M, Smeulders AWM, Koelma D, Yan F, Tahir MA, Mikolajczyk K, Kittler J (2008) The MediaMill TRECVID 2008 semantic video search engine. In: Over P, Awad G, Rose RT, Fiscus JG, Kraaij W, Smeaton AF (eds) TRECVID, National Institute of Standards and Technology(NIST)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sobe A (2009) Single sign-on in IMS-based IPTV systems:towards the interworking of the generic bootstrapping architecture and liberty alliance identity federation. VDM-Verlag Dr. Müller AGGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sobe A, Böszörmenyi L, Taschwer M (2010) Video notation (ViNo): a formalism for describing and evaluating non-sequential multimedia access. IARIA, International Journal on Advances in Software 3(12), 19–30Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sobe A, Elmenreich W, Böszörmenyi L (2010) Towards a self-organizing replication model for non-sequential media access. In: Sapmia'2010: ACM Multimedia 2010 Workshop - Social, Adaptive and Personalized Multimedia Interaction and Access, ACM PressGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Spielvogel C, Boeszoermenyi L (2007) Quality-of-service based video replication. In: SMAP '07: Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Semantic Media Adaptation and Personalization, IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 21–26Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Spielvogel C, Böszörmenyi L (2007) Active and passive replication of multimedia content in a proxy-to-proxy network (X2X). In: PDCN'07: Proceedings of the 25th conference IASTED International Multi-Conference. Parallel and Distributed computing and networks, ACTA Press, Anaheim, CA, USA, pp. 303–308Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Uijlings JRR, Smeulders AWM, Scha RJH (2009) Real-time bag of words, approximately CIVR '09: Proceeding of the ACM International Conference on Image and Video Retrieval, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 1–8Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Verbeek J, Guillaumin M, Mensink T, Schmid C (2010) Image annotation with tagprop on the MIRFLICKR set. In: MIR ‘10: Proceedings of the international conference on Multimedia information retrieval. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 537–546Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Vlavianos A, Iliofotou M, Faloutsos M (2006) BiToS: enhancing BitTorrent for supporting streaming applications. In INFOCOM'2006: 25th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, IEEE, pp. 1–6Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Wieser S, Böszörmenyi L (2010) Flocks: interest-based construction of overlay networks. In: MMedia'2010: Second International Conference on Advances in Multimedia, Athens, Greece, pp. 119–124Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Yang J, Jiang Y-G, Hauptmann AG, Ngo C-W (2007) Evaluating bag-of-visual-words representations in scene classification MIR '07: Proceedings of the international workshop on Workshop on multimedia information retrieval, ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp. 197–206Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laszlo Böszörmenyi
    • 1
  • Manfred del Fabro
    • 1
  • Marian Kogler
    • 1
  • Mathias Lux
    • 1
  • Oge Marques
    • 2
  • Anita Sobe
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Information TechnologyKlagenfurt UniversityKlagenfurtAustria
  2. 2.Department of Computer and Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceFlorida Atlantic UniversityBoca RatonUSA

Personalised recommendations