A Virtual Animated Commentator Architecture for Cybersecurity Competitions

  • Ruth Agada
  • Jie Yan
  • Weifeng Xu
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 738)


Cybersecurity competitions are exciting for the game participants; however, the excitement and educational value do not necessarily transfer to audiences because audiences may not be experts in the field. To improve the audiences’ comprehension and engagement levels at these events, we have proposed a virtual commentator architecture for cybersecurity competitions. Based on the architecture, we have developed a virtual animated agent that serves as a commentator in cybersecurity competition. This virtual commentator can interact with audiences with facial expressions and the corresponding hand gestures. The commentator can provide several types of feedback including causal, congratulatory, deleterious, assistive, background, and motivational responses. In addition, when producing speech, the lips, tongue, and jaw provide visual cues that complement auditory cues. The virtual commentator is flexible enough to be employed in the Collegiate Cyber Defense Competitions environment. Our preliminary results demonstrate the architecture can generate phonemes with timestamps and behavioral tags. These timestamps and tags provide solid building blocks for implementing desired responsive behaviors.


Virtual agent Software architecture Cybersecurity Education Animation  



This work is mainly supported by grant NSF-DUE 1303424 and partially supported by grant NSF-HBCU-UP 1714261.


  1. 1.
    R.S. Cheung, J.P. Cohen, H.Z. Lo, F. Elia, V. Carrillo-Marquez, Effectiveness of cybersecurity competitions, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Security and Management (SAM), (2012), p. 1Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C. Turner, J. Yan, D. Richards, P.O. Brien, J. Odubiyi, Q. Brown, LUCID: A visualization and broadcast system for cyber defense competitions. ACM Inroads 6(2), 70–76 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Agada, J. Yan, Leveraging automated animated agent commentary to improve sense-making for novice users at cybersecurity competitions. Natl. Cybersecurity Inst. J. 3(1), 47–55 (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. O’Leary, Small-scale cyber security competitions, in Proceeding of the 16th Colloquium for Information Systems Education, (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Groen, How video games are becoming the next great North American spectator sport, arstechnica, (2012), [Online]. Accessed 1 Jan 2017
  6. 6.
    History of CCDC, National collegiate cyber defense competition. [Online]. Accessed 1 Jan 2017
  7. 7.
    A. Conklin, The use of a collegiate cyber defense competition in information security education. in Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Conference on Information Security Curriculum Development—InfoSecCD’05, (2005), p. 16Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Cheung, J. Huang, Starcraft from the stands: understanding the game spectator, in Proc. SIGCHI Conf. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst., (2011), pp. 763–772Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Wittenburg, H. Brugman, A. Russel, A. Klassmann, H. Sloetjes, ELAN: a professional framework for multimodality research, in Proceedings of LREC 2006, Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    M. Schröder, J. Trouvain, The German text-to-speech synthesis system MARY: a tool for research, development and teaching. Int. J. Speech Technol. 6, 365–377 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Schröder, M. Schröder, Interpolating expressions in unit selection, in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction, 2(2), 718–720 (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    CereVoice Engine Text-to-Speech SDK, CereProc. [Online]. Accessed 1 Jan 2017
  13. 13.
    M. Aylett, C. Pidcock, The CereVoice characterful speech synthesiser SDK. AISB 2007, 174–178 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    LipSync Documentation, Rogo Digital, (2016), [Online]. Accessed 5 May 2017
  15. 15.
    G.B. White, D. Williams, The Collegiate Cyber Defense Competition, in 9th Colloq. Inf. Syst. Secur. Educ., (2005), pp. 26–31Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    G.B. White, D. Ph, I. Assurance, The National Collegiate Cyber Defense, in 10th Colloquium for Information Systems Security Education, (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    T. Rosenberg, W.W. Security, C.O. Brien, The growth of the Mid-Atlantic CCDC: public—private partnerships at work, in Proceedings of the 12th Colloquium for Information Systems Security Education, (2008), pp. 72–76Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    A. Carlin, D.P. Manson, J. Zhu, Developing the cyber defenders of tomorrow with regional collegiate cyber defense competitions (CCDC). Inf. Syst. Educ. J. 8(14), 3–10 (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    A. Cook, R.G. Smith, L. Maglaras, H. Janicke, SCIPS: using experiential learning to raise cyber situational awareness in industrial control system. Int. J. Cyber Warf. Terror. 7, (2017)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    B. Hallaq, A. Nicholson, R. Smith, L. Maglaras, H. Janicke, K. Jones, CYRAN: a hybrid cyber range for testing security on ICS/SCADA systems, in Security Solutions and Applied Cryptography in Smart Grid Communications, (2017)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    A. Furfaro, A. Piccolo, D. Sacca, A. Parise, A virtual environment for the enactment of realistic cyber security scenarios, in Proc. 2016 Int. Conf. Cloud Comput. Technol. Appl. CloudTech 2016, (2017), pp. 351–358Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. Werther, M. Zhivich, T. Leek, N. Zeldovich, Experiences in cyber security education: the MIT Lincoln Laboratory capture-the-flag exercise, in Proceedings of the 4th Workshop on Cyber Security Experimentation and Test, (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    N. Capalbo, T. Reed, M. Arpaia, RTFn: enabling cybersecurity education through a mobile capture the flag client, in Proceedings of SAM’11, (2011), pp. 500–506Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    M.E. Whitman, H.J. Mattord, A. Green, Incident response: planning, in Principles of Incident Response and Disaster Recovery, 2nd edn. (Cengage Learning, 2013), p. 131Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    S. Jajodia, S. Noel, P. Kalapa, M. Albanese, J. Williams, Cauldron mission-centric cyber situational awareness with defense in depth, in 2011—MILCOM 2011 Military Communications Conference, (2011), pp. 1339–1344Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceBowie State UniversityBowieUSA

Personalised recommendations