WG1Percept/Minutes_2008_09_18

WG1 MEETING: SEPTEMBER 18, 2008 – JYVÄSKYLÄ

Homepage of WG1: http://www.cost-sid.org/wiki/WG1Percept


PARTICIPANTS

Roberto Bresin (RB), Fabien Gouyon (FG), Dik J. Hermes (DJH)

Due to the limited number of participants the meeting was quite short and focused mainly on the discussion about evaluation experiments of a common use case.

At the beginning of the meeting Goals and Objectives of WG1 were reminded to the participants.


NEXT WG1 MEETING

It was first discussed were to have the next WG1 meeting. It was proposed to have a “think-tank” meeting of a few days in some place. We will use this meeting mainly for writing a common paper on evaluation methods for sound in interaction. The meeting will take place when all WG1 partner will complete evaluation experiments on a common use case.


WG1 AMBASSADORS

During the last  SID Steering Committee Meeting in Copenhagen it was decided that WGs need to interact more with each other. In order to do this, it was decided to appoint so called “WG ambassadors” in different fields of action. “WG Ambassadors: Each working group should have one member responsible for bibliography, examples, evaluation, web. These WG ambassadors are to be selected at the next WG meeting. Each of these four groups of WG ambassadors should meet at each MC meeting to synchronise.” In order to do this, it was decided to appoint as WG1 ambassadors in different fields the following delegates:


BIBLIOGRAPHY

FG suggested to develop the bibliography by using a wiki format so that it will be possible to modify/add information


STSMs

RB proposed to relate STSMs to WGs in SID in order to identify the distribution of STSMs and determine the need for more STSMs targeted towards specific WGs.


EVALUATION STUDY

In the previous WG1 meeting in Florence it was proposed to design a common experiment for comparing different evaluation methods. The experiment should lead to the publication of joint paper.

RB, FG, DH analyzed and discussed about the content of the slides provided by Nicolas Misdariis (substituting Patrick Susini) the day before the WG1 meeting (Nicolas himself did not participate to the meeting). Patrick Susini had proposed in the previous meeting of using the sonification of an ATM machine as possible case study.

It was proposed that each WG1 partner should apply different methods of evaluation according to partner’s expertise. For example:

  • Emotion classification/identification (Bresin)
  • Motion caption (Bresin/Godøy?)
  • Feature extraction (Gouyon)
  • Usability test (Hermes)
  • Mimicking sounds (Godøy)

RB, FG, DH came up with a couple of questions to Patrick Susini who proposed the ATM machine case study:

  • Step 1: Does judgments of naturalness found at step 1 agree with naturalness of sounds at step 0?
  • Slide 24. About question (a) The system is “more easy to use” compared to what?

RB proposed that it would be interesting to consider more scenarios where a keypad is used together with sound, and not only as in the ATM machine case. For example it could be evaluated how the quality of a keypad varies when the sounds made by keys are changed. Other examples are the keypad in telephones, door locks, door openers, and safes.