As a thought experiment, I considered how rt-ai Edge could be used to implement a next generation gym. The thought was sparked by Orangetheory who make nice use of technology to enhance the gym experience. The question was: where next? My answer is here: rt-ai smart gym. It would be fun to implement some of these ideas!
In order to avoid the whole garbage in, garbage out problem, I want to make sure that the long term data that I am collecting from the ZeroSensors and IP cameras is actually what I think it is. rtaiView is an rt-ai Edge app that allows both real-time streams and historic stored data to be reviewed in a convenient way. It can be used to check both raw data and extracted metadata for each stream. The screen capture above shows an rtaiView instance monitoring the real-time streams from two external IP cameras and the three streams (video, audio and multi-channel sensor) from a ZeroSensor. I am going to add a second ZeroSensor in a second internal location and then let the whole thing run for a while. Just to make life complicated I am using the straight TensorFlow object detector for the external cameras and DeepLabv3 segmentation in color map mode for the internal cameras so that I don’t upset the other inhabitants who aren’t keen on me putting cameras everywhere.
Focus now is moving on to extracting interesting sequences from the stored data and then using these to train an anomaly detector. The exact architecture of the anomaly detector is still a bit unclear – definitely a research project.
Finally this is a ZeroSensor all ready to go into full time service, capturing video, audio and environmental data. The goal is to use this data, and that from other cameras around the space, as training data for machine learning systems.
One specific goal is to create an anomaly detector with minimal supervision. As much as possible, it will learn from experience. This is kind of tricky as it requires detection of unknown length sequences depending on the circumstances. I am intrigued by the ideas behind the Universal Translator but not sure how much could carry over to this application. This paper reviews some of the techniques usually applied, at least for video processing. The situation here is a little different as there are quite different types of features involved. My plan is to preprocess video and audio to recognize salient features (using object detection or whatever) and then input these features, along with environmental sensor data, in the form of uniform time-slotted data sets to the anomaly detector. This doesn’t help with detecting the length of an interesting sequence – that’s the fun part of the project.
I am now pulling things together so that I can use the ZeroSensors to perform long-term data collection. Data generated by the rt-ai Edge design is passed into the Manifold and then captured by ManifoldStore, one of the standard Manifold nodes. Obviously it would be nice to know that meaningful data is being stored and that’s where rtaiView comes in. The screen capture above shows the real-time display when it has been configured to receive streams from the video and data components of the ZeroSensor streams. This is showing the streams from a couple of ZeroSensors but more can be added and the display adjusts accordingly.
This is the simple ZeroSpace design as seen in the rtaiDesigner editor window. The hardware setup consists of the ZeroSensors running the SensorZero synth stream processor element (SPE) and a server running the DeepLabv3 SPEs and the ManifoldZero synths. The ManifoldZero synths consist of a couple of PutManifold SPEs that take each stream from the ZeroSensor and map it to a Manifold stream.
ManifoldStore captures these streams and persists them to disk as can be seen from the screen capture above.
This allows rtaiView to display the real-time data coming from the ZeroSensors and historic data based on timecode.
The screen capture above shows rtaiView in historic (or DVR) mode. The control widget (at the top right) allows the user to scan through periods of time and visualize the data. The same timecode is used for all streams displayed, making it easy to correlate events between them.
rtaiView is a useful tool for checking that the rt-ai Edge design is operating correctly and that the data stored is useful. In these examples, I have set DeepLabv3 to color map recognized objects. However, this is not the desired mode as I just want to store images that have people detected in them and then have the images only contain the people. The ultimate goal is to use these image sequences along with other sensor data to detect anomalous behavior and also to predict actions so that the rt-ai Edge enabled sentient space can be proactive in taking actions.
One of the goals of the rt-ai Edge system is that users of the system can use whatever device they have available to interact and extract value from it. Unity is a tremendous help given that Unity apps can be run on pretty much everything. The main task was integration with Manifold so that all apps can receive and interact with everything else in the system. Manifold currently supports Windows, UWP, Linux, Android and macOS. iOS is a notable absentee and will hopefully be added at some point in the future. However, I perceive Android support as more significant as it also leads to multiple MR headset support.
The screen shot above and video below show three instances of the rt-ai viewer apps running on Windows desktop, Windows Mixed Reality and Android interacting in a shared sentient space. Ok, so the avatars are rubbish (I call them Sad Robots) but that’s just a detail and can be improved later. The wall panels are receiving sensor and video data from ZeroSensors via an rt-ai Edge stream processing network while the light switch is operated via a home automation server and Insteon.
Sharing is mediated by a SharingServer that is part of Manifold. The SharingServer uses Manifold multicast and end to end services to implement scalable sharing while minimizing the load on each individual device. Ultimately, the SharingServer will also download the space definition file when the user enters a sentient space and also provide details of virtual objects that may have been placed in the space by other users. This allows a new user with a standard app to enter a space and quickly create a view of the sentient space consistent with existing users.
While this is all kind of fun, the more interesting thing is when this is combined with a HoloLens or similar MR headset. The MR headset user in a space would see any VR users in the space represented by their avatars. Likewise, VR users in a space would see avatars representing MR users in the space. The idea is to get as close to a telepresent experience for VR users as possible without very complex setups. It would be much nicer to use Holoportation but that would require every room in the space has a very complex and expensive setup which really isn’t the point. The idea is to make it very easy and low cost to implement an rt-ai Edge based sentient space.
Still lots to do of course. One big thing is audio. Another is representing interaction devices (pointers, motion controllers etc) to all users. Right now, each app just sends out the camera transform to the SharingServer which then distributes this to all other users. This will be extended to include PCM audio chunks and transforms for interaction devices so that everyone will be able to create a meaningful scene. Each user will receive the audio stream from every other user. The reason for this is that then each individual audio stream can be attached to the avatar for each user giving a spatialized sound effect using Unity capabilities (that’s the hope anyway). Another very important thing is that the apps work differently if they are running on VR type devices or AR/MR type devices. In the latter case, the walls and related objects are not drawn and just the colliders instantiated although virtual objects and avatars will be visible. Obviously AR/MR users want to see the real walls, light switches etc, not the virtual representations. However, they will still be able to interact in exactly the same way as a VR user.
These days, machine learning techniques have led to the ability to create very realistic but fake video and audio that can be tough to distinguish from the real thing. The video above shows a very interesting example of this capability. The problem with this technology is that it will become impossible to determine if anything is genuine at all. What’s needed is some verification that a video of someone (for example) really is that person. Blockchain technology would seem to provide a solution for this.
Many years ago I was working on a digital watermarking-based system for detecting tampering in video records. Essentially, this embedded error-correcting codes in each frame that could be used to determine if any region of a frame had been modified after the digital watermark had been added. Cameras would add the digital watermark at source, limiting the opportunity for modification prior to watermarking.
One problem with this is that it worked on a frame by frame basis but didn’t ensure the integrity of an entire sequence. In theory this could be done with temporally distributed watermarks but blockchain technology provides a very nice alternative.
A simple strategy would be to have the sensor (camera, microphone, motion detector, whatever) create a hash for each unit of data (video frame, chunk of audio etc) and add this to a blockchain. Then a review app could create new hashes from the sensor data itself (stored elsewhere) and compare them to those in the blockchain. It could also determine that the account owner or device is who or what it is supposed to be in order to avoid spoofing. It’s easy to envisage an Etherium smart contract being the basis of such a system.
One issue with this is the potential rate at which hashes need to be added to the blockchain. This rate could be reduce by collecting more data (e.g. accumulating one second’s worth of data to generate one hash) or creating a hash of hashes at an appropriate rate. The only downside to this is losing temporal resolution of where changes have been made.
It’s worth considering the effects of lossy compression. Obviously if a stream is uncompressed or only uses lossless compression, watermarking and hash generation can be done at a very early stage. Watermarking of video is designed to withstand compression so that can still be done at a very early stage, even with lossy compression. The hash has to be be bit-accurate with the stream as stored on the video storage medium though so the hash must be computed after lossy compression.
It seems as though this blockchain concept could definitely be made to work and possibly combined with the digital watermarking technique in the case of video to provide temporal and spatial resolution of tampering. I am sure that variations of this concept are out there already or being developed and maybe, one day, it will be possible for anybody to check if a video of a well-known person is real or fake.
The Windows Mixed Reality version of 3DView is now working nicely. Had a few problems with my Windows development PC which is a few years old and didn’t have adequate USB ports. In the end this PCI-e USB 3.1 card solved that problem otherwise a complete upgrade might have been required. A different USB 3.0 card did not work however.
Hopefully this is the last time that I see the displays all lined up like that. The space modeling software is coming along and soon it will be possible to model a space with a (relatively) simple procedural definition file. Potentially this could be texture mapped from a 3D scan of rooms but the simplified models generated procedurally with simple textures might well be good enough. Then it will be possible to position versions of these displays (and lots of other things) in the correct rooms.
XRView is intended to be runnable both on Windows MR headsets (I am using the Samsung Odyssey as it has a good display and built-in audio) and HoloLens. Now clearly VR modes and AR modes have to be completely different. In VR, you navigate and interact with the motion controllers and see the modeled space whereas in AR you navigate by walking around, interact using the clicker and don’t see the modeled space directly. However, the modeled space will still be there and will be used instead of the spatially mapped surfaces that the HoloLens might normally use. This means that objects placed in the model by a VR user will appear to AR users correctly positioned and vice versa. One key advantage of using the modeled space rather than the dynamically mapped space generated by the HoloLens itself is that it is easy to add context to the surfaces using the procedural model language. Another is the ability to interwork with non-HoloLens AR headsets that can share the HoloLens spatial map data. The procedural model becomes a platform-independent spatial mapping that “just” leaves the problem of spatial synchronization to the individual headsets.
I am sure that there will be some fun challenges in getting spatial synchronization but that’s something for later.