D4.3.1 FHW Experiment Design and Plan v1.0

7/31/2019 D4.3.1 FHW Experiment Design and Plan v1.0

1/38


2/38

EXPERIMEDIA Dissemination Level: PU

Copyright IME and other members of the EXPERIMEDIA consortium 2012 1

Project acronym EXPERIMEDIA

Full title Experiments in live social and networked media experiences

Grant agreement number 287966

Funding scheme Large-scale Integrating Project (IP)

Work programme topic Objective ICT-2011.1.6 Future Internet Research andExperimentation (FIRE)

Project start date 2011-10-01

Project duration 36 months

Activity 4 Experimentation

Workpackage 4.3 EX3: shared, real-time, immersive and interactive cultural andeducational experiences

Deliverable lead organisation IME

Authors Manolis Wallace, Anthousis Andreadis, Efstathia Chatzi (IME)

Reviewers Wolfgang Halb (JRS), Stephen C. Phillips (ITInnov)

Version 1.0

Status Final

Dissemination level PU: Public

Due date PM8 (2012-05-31)

Delivery date 2012-08-10


3/38



Table of Contents

1. Executive summary ............................................................................................................................ 5

2. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 6

3. The FHW embedded experiment .................................................................................................... 8

3.1. Vision .......................................................................................................................................... 8

3.2. Experiences currently offered ............................................................................................... 10

3.3. The experience examined in the embedded experiment ................................................... 10

3.4. Experience architecture .......................................................................................................... 12

3.5. Component tear-down ........................................................................................................... 13

3.5.1. Smart devices ....................................................................................................................... 13

3.5.2. Streaming .............................................................................................................................. 13

3.5.3. Experts Toolbox ................................................................................................................ 13

4. Experiment design ............................................................................................................................ 14

4.1. Goals ......................................................................................................................................... 14

4.1.1. Goal 1: Be an EXPERIMEDIA test bed ........................................................................ 14

4.1.2. Goal 2: Explore suitability of FIRE technologies for the field under

examination .......................................................................................................................... 14

4.1.3. Goal 3: Measure impact of FIRE technologies .............................................................. 144.1.4. Goal 4: Identify parameters that affect impact ............................................................... 14

4.2. Experiment procedure ............................................................................................................ 15

4.2.1. Preparatory phase................................................................................................................ 15

4.2.2. Execution phase .................................................................................................................. 15

4.2.3. Data acquisition phase ....................................................................................................... 16

4.2.4. Analysis phase...................................................................................................................... 17

4.3. Examined parameters ............................................................................................................. 17

4.4. Experiment evaluation ........................................................................................................... 18

4.4.1. Baseline success ................................................................................................................... 18

4.4.2. Moderate success ................................................................................................................ 18

4.4.3. Success .................................................................................................................................. 19

4.4.4. Exceptional success ............................................................................................................ 19

4.5. Recruiting ................................................................................................................................. 20

4.5.1. Random visitors .................................................................................................................. 20

4.5.2. Organized groups ................................................................................................................ 20


4/38



4.5.3. Summer schools and other FHW activities..................................................................... 20

4.6. Constraints ............................................................................................................................... 20

5. Experimental facility implementation ............................................................................................ 22

5.1. System architecture ................................................................................................................. 22

5.1.1. The architecture in the scope of the experiment............................................................ 25

5.2. Requirements ........................................................................................................................... 25

5.2.1. Requirements on the FHW facility ................................................................................... 25

5.2.2. Required components by FHW (development) ............................................................. 26

5.2.3. Requirements for input from EXPERIMEDIA partners ............................................ 26

5.3. Content lifecycle ...................................................................................................................... 27

6. Ethics, privacy, PIA .......................................................................................................................... 28

6.1. Minimum ethical principles ................................................................................................... 28

6.1.1. Doing good .......................................................................................................................... 28

6.1.2. Doing no harm .................................................................................................................... 29

6.1.3. Risk management ................................................................................................................ 29

6.1.4. Consent................................................................................................................................. 29

6.1.5. Confidentiality ..................................................................................................................... 29

6.1.6. Data protection ................................................................................................................... 30

6.2. Ethical oversight principles ................................................................................................... 30

6.2.1. Informed consent ............................................................................................................... 30

6.2.2. Deception ............................................................................................................................. 30

6.2.3. Data collection..................................................................................................................... 30

6.2.4. Withdrawal from the investigation ................................................................................... 31

6.2.5. Observational research ....................................................................................................... 31

6.2.6. Data protection regulation ................................................................................................. 31

6.2.7. Consortium partner responsibility .................................................................................... 316.3. Points to consider in the FHW embedded experiment ..................................................... 31

6.4. PIA ............................................................................................................................................ 32

6.4.1. PIA phase 1 .......................................................................................................................... 32

6.4.2. PIA phase 2 .......................................................................................................................... 32

7. Risks .................................................................................................................................................... 33

7.1. Risks for the participants ....................................................................................................... 33

7.2. Risks for the experiment ........................................................................................................ 34

8. Current status and plan for implementation ................................................................................. 35


5/38



8.1. Current status ........................................................................................................................... 35

8.1.1. Video capture ...................................................................................................................... 35

8.1.2. Streaming .............................................................................................................................. 35

8.1.3. Experts toolbox.................................................................................................................. 35

8.1.4. Augmented reality ............................................................................................................... 35

8.2. Future plans ............................................................................................................................. 36

9. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................... 37


6/38



1. Executive summaryThis deliverable outlines the design and plan for EXPERIMEDIAs embedded experiment

focusing on shared, real-time, immersive and interactive cultural and educational and executed by

the Foundation of the Hellenic World at its premises at Hellenic Cosmos in Athens.

Starting with this executive summary and an introductory note in section 2, the remaining of this

document is organized as follows:

Section 3 presents the venues vision with respect to the technologies discussed in the

experiment and their ways in which they will be used in order to enhance the cultural and

educational experiences that the venue is able to provide to its visitors. The section closes with a

presentation of the user interaction scenario that will be supported by the embedded experiment.

With that in mind, Section 4 provides the technical and methodological description of theexperiment. This includes the specification of the experiments goals, the procedure that will be

followed, the data that will be collected and the way in which this data collection will be

achieved, the way the data will be analysed and the parameters that will be studied. This follows

from the corresponding scenario, as it was defined in deliverable D2.1.2, as well as from the

methodological guidelines described in D2.1.1.

Section 5 presents the detailed architecture of the experimental facilities that will be developed

and utilized for the needs of this experiment. This follows from the architectural blueprint

described in the D2.1.3.

Section 6 discusses ethical and privacy concerns that may be relevant to the experiment in

question. This follows from the ethical and data protection guidelines that have been established

in deliverable D5.1.1. Special emphasis is given to the Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA)

methodology dictated in D2.1.1.

Section 7 presents the current status of the work and discusses the projected timeline for the

execution of the different tasks that are related to the implementation and analysis of the

experiment, following from the DoW as well as from the implementation plans of the relevant

activities of other EXPERIMEDIA WPs.


7/38



2. IntroductionThis deliverable describes the experiment design and plan for one of the three embedded

experiments that use the EXPERIMEDIA facility. EXPERIMEDIA is a "FIRE" (Future

Internet Research and Experimentation) project. For the project and in this context"experimentation" means that we do not know exactly beforehand what the researchers using

the EXPERIMEDIA facility will want to do. The embedded experiments are used to provide

requirements during facility development and to verify and validate the facility capabilities to be

used by further experiments that are either funded during the open calls or unfunded.

In our embedded experiment we shall develop a testing setting that will relate the FHW 3D

content and the FHW real-time rendering engine with new and innovative user oriented media

services. Using this setting we will explore the possibility to present this content in different

device and network contexts, to single users and to user groups, in real-time, whilst supporting

the live interaction between all involved user groups. We will also explore how the providedservices may be enhanced with the exploitation of social media extensions.

In order to achieve the above we will extend the existing 3D content provision infrastructure

with capabilities such as live interaction with remote users and Augmented Reality (AR). This

will allow us to offer two additional services to the ones currently available to our visitors: real

time feedback by the content experts themselves and association of real objects to the ones

contained in the virtual worlds and to the digital metadata that is available at FHW.

Through suitable experimentation with real users we will examine on one hand the suitability of

the utilized approach and future internet technologies for this type of applications and on theother hand how the technical parameters of these technologies affect the Quality of Experience

(QoE) that is finally offered to the participating end users.

The successful execution of this embedded experiment will provide a validation for the overall

architecture and approach to experimentation followed in EXPERIMEDIA, and the experience

gathered during the execution of the experiment will be vital towards the better planning for and

execution of future EXPERIMEDIA experiments.

The remainder of this document is organized as follows:

Section 3 presents the venues vision with respect to the technologies discussed in the

experiment and their ways in which they will be used in order to enhance the cultural and

educational experiences that the venue is able to provide to its visitors. The section closes with a

presentation of the user interaction scenario that will be supported by the embedded experiment.

With that in mind, Section 4 provides the technical and methodological description of the

experiment. This includes the specification of the experiments goals, the procedure that will be

followed, the data that will be collected and the way in which this data collection will be

achieved, the way the data will be analysed and the parameters that will be studied. This follows

from the corresponding scenario, as it was defined in deliverable D2.1.2, as well as from themethodological guidelines described in D2.1.1.


8/38



Section 5 presents the detailed architecture of the experimental facilities that will be developed

and utilized for the needs of this experiment. This follows from the architectural blueprint

described in the D2.1.3.

Section 6 discusses ethical and privacy concerns that may be relevant to the experiment in

question. This follows from the ethical and data protection guidelines that have been established

in deliverable D5.1.1. Special emphasis is given to the Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA)

methodology dictated in D2.1.1.

Section 7 presents the current status of the work and discusses the projected timeline for the

execution of the different tasks that are related to the implementation and analysis of the

experiment, following from the DoW as well as from the implementation plans of the relevant

activities of other EXPERIMEDIA WPs.


9/38



3. The FHW embedded experimentThe experiment will be conducted at the Hellenic Cosmos, the Foundation of the Hellenic

Worlds privately owned cultural centre in Athens. The Hellenic Cosmos boasts the Tholos, a

unique dome shaped VR theatre that provides VR content that is rendered in real time, based onthe commands issued by the personnel running the facilities and adapted to the needs and likes

of each group of people that visit it. This will be the centre of the embedded experiment.

Being a part of the Foundation of the Hellenic World, Hellenic Cosmos is strategically oriented

towards the exploration and exploitation of new and emerging technologies in order to enhance

the services it is able to offer. It is exactly this reason that has urged FHW to make Hellenic

Cosmos a smart venue of EXPERIMEDIA, as this will give us the opportunity to have a first-

hand experience with FIRE technologies.

Clearly, at FHW we are extremely keen in experimenting with any promising new technology,and therefore we look forward not only to the results from our own embedded experiment but

also to those of the experimenters that will join the project at a later date. Making our focus

more specific, in the following we start by presenting our vision with respect to the integration

of the selected technologies for the FHW embedded experiment (AR, social media, streaming) to

the Hellenic Cosmos facilities. We then move on to present the current mode of operation of the

venue and how this will be extended using the EXPERIMEDIA technology in the scope of the

embedded experiment.

3.1. VisionOur aim at FHW has always been to exploit all sorts of capabilities that technology has to offer

at any given time, in order to create and provide engaging cultural and educational experiences.

As such, in this experiment we aim to cross-fertilize AR and social media with traditional virtual

reality installations in order to provide a cultural and educational experience that should put

visitors in touch with what is fundamentally engaging, help them build a scaffolding of the

historical core concepts and motivate them to go deeper into the subject themselves.

Augmented Reality (AR) brings the virtual world to the physical world. Information such as

audio or computer graphics is layered over real objects in a manner that is attracting widespread

attention and is being used to create applications for a range of uses. Research has suggested, forexample, the potential for using augmented reality location-based games (AR/LBS games) that

use wireless handheld devices to provide virtual game information in a physical environment, as

an educational tool.

Augmented Reality mobile applications are beginning to change the way visitors of museums, art

galleries and tourist locations in general see and interact with the physical world. Augmented

Reality also appeals to constructivist notions of education where students take control of their

own learning, and interact with the real and virtual environments. These types of training provide

opportunities for more authentic learning and appeal to multiple learning styles. AR applications

can provide each student with his/her own unique discovery path, move from a rote learningconcepts and an I teach-you listen method to a more active and participatory learning method


10/38



where learners take responsibility for learning and are engaged participants rather than passive

observers.

Besides the learning experience itself, the social aspect of a museum visit should not be

underestimated. People tend to visit museums in groups and have shared experiences. Thus, by

interconnecting with social networks we can also provide access to one of the main methods of

socializing among youth. In this manner the provided experience can foster collaboration and

introduce fun during the sometimes long and tiresome waiting queues associated with VR

exhibits, without alienating the visitor form the main theme of the VR exhibit they are about to

experience.

With the continuous advances of game consoles, VR systems simply have to keep up. Therefore

they cannot afford to remain fresh from a visual only standpoint; they need to address more of

the visitors senses, provide multiple and diverse stimuli, and employ a variety of new and

ubiquitous technologies not only during the show, but also during the pre- and post-show of the

primary VR installation.

Another direction in which museums have to work hard is that of dynamic information. The

type of information that is available in static exhibitions, regardless of the rarity and importance

of the exhibits, can hardly be considered as exciting for the general public. Museums have

realized that a long time ago, and have tried to fill the gap with the use of museum guides, i.e.

with individuals who have some sort of expertise on the exhibits and provide the information in

a more lively and intuitive manner to groups of visitors. Although this has been a step in the

right direction, the expertise of the tour guide has always been a point of weakness, as typically

tour guides are not true experts but rather individuals who have studied a predefinedpresentation script and have little ability to operate outside it. Of course hiring true experts as

museum guides is not an option; even if they are available, as is the case with FHW, their

expertise is too useful and expensive for them to be on standby at the museum in case they are

needed. Furthermore, a truly intuitive and free navigation, allowing the visitor to wonder and

receive information of any type and on any topic conceivable, would require the involvement of

multiple experts in the guidance of each individual group, which is simply unrealistic.

Streaming technology is an ideal tool when there is a need to synchronously transmit heavy

streams of information to multiple remote locations. This type of technology can make it

possible for multiple individuals, and more specifically for the various experts employed byFHW, to monitor the on-going visits and step in providing specialized information, when and if

that is required. Such a service would allow the venue to provide less structured and therefore

considerably more engaging and stimulating experiences, as the visitors could be given more

control over the direction of their experience.

Combining all the above, the provided immersive experience will be extended and enhanced,

and the visitor will feel that his whole visit to the museum, not just the few minutes of the VR

show, forms a unique experience of immersion into a digitally enhanced world.


11/38



3.2. Experiences currently offeredAs has already been mentioned, the embedded experiment is built around the VR immersion

experience offered by the Tholos. Currently, this is offered mainly as a standalone experience

that is not necessarily combined with any of the other exhibits or services of Hellenic Cosmos.

The typical operation of the Tholos and of the service it offers to its visitors may be graphically

modeled as in Figure 1. It is easy to see that this is a mainly one-way communication system, as

the museum educator controls the system, thus specifying what the Tholos system will render

and project to the visitors, while at the same time commenting on it. As a sole exception to this,

visitors are able to participate in electronic polls which determine the path that the Educator will

follow altering in this way the flow of the presentation in real time. The main reason for this

extremely structured and predefined approach is that the museum educator is working with

predefined scenarios, i.e. descriptive texts prepared by the FHW experts. These texts provide

information on the 3D worlds in a specific order and therefore the tour in the 3D world has to

follow the same order, otherwise the museum educator would be unable to providesynchronized information.

Figure 1. Tholos operation without EXPERIMEDIA extensions.

3.3. The experience examined in the embedded experimentUtilizing the advanced capabilities offered by the components developed by the

EPXERIMEDIA technical partners this communication model will be extended in at least two

directions, as shown in Figure 2.

Navigation

Control

Tholos Dome

Theater

USERS

MuseumEducator

Visitor

FHW FACILITIES

1

2

3


12/38



In this model visitors, upon their arrival at the premises of Hellenic Cosmos, will be given

brochures will with details about the show they will be attending (a travel to ancient Miletus).

Specific markers will exists inside the brochure the use of which will be described later.

Furthermore the visitors will be given Smart Mobile Devices that will have the FHW mobile

application installed. The visitors at this point may enter their social media credentials to the

mobile application.

Figure 2. Tholos operation with EXPERIMEDIA extensions.

The next stop will be the Tholos installation where they will attend the show about ancient

Miletus. As has already been mentioned, a museum educator will be guiding the experience by

controlling the content that is visualized in Tholos. But, in contrast to the conventional Tholos

experience, visitors will now have the opportunity to make a larger impact to their shared

experiences, either by requesting that a different path is taken or simply by asking the questions

that they find most interesting, using the smart devices. In addition to the museum educator,visitors will actually be interacting with FHW experts, mainly historians, archaeologists and

NavigationControl

Tholos

DomeTheater

USERS

Museum

Educator Visitor

FHW FACILITIES

MobileApplicationExpertsToolbox

Museum

Educator


13/38



architects. These experts will not be located at the Tholos installation, but will be virtually

attending the show remotely and will be available to provide additional information when the

visitors ask for something more specialized or even when simply the path taken in the 3D world

is one that the museum educator is not properly trained to support.

Using the smart devices the visitors will also have the opportunity to review several of the 3D

models that they saw during the show. This will be achieved using the markers on the brochures

they have been given. Furthermore they will either be given a guided tour of Hellenic Cosmos or

they will have the opportunity to wonder around on their own. In both cases they will be able to

retrieve additional information, namely related 3D content, about the various exhibits that they

will examine, using the markers that will be placed next to them.

3.4. Experience architectureIn this subsection we discuss the components that will be used in order to make possible the

provision of the abovementioned experience. We refer to this as architecture of the experiencerather than the experiment, as the architecture of the experiment will have to include additional

components that are not related to the service offered to the visitors but rather to the

experimental process itself (i.e. monitoring of the experiment, measurement of parameters, etc)

As shown in Figure 2 a set of applications will be provided to the remote experts so that he can

virtually attend the show and communicate with the visitors and provide details on the displayed

content; we refer to this as the Experts Toolbox. The Experts Toolbox aims to allow remote

experts to join and support the museum educator in providing details on the displayed content.

In order to make this possible the toolbox will include the following:

An application that will allow the expert to know what is displayed in the Tholos. This

will be achieved through the provision of live streaming video from the Tholos. The

stream will also include audio from the educator, thus allowing the expert to know not

only what the visitors see, but also what it is that they have already been told. They will

also be able to be asked questions directly from the museum educator.

An application that will allow the expert to interact directly with the audience. This will

be achieved through social media, making the interaction shared.

The second extension of the operation model regards the inclusion of a smart device operated by

the visitor. This will be equipped with a suitable mobile application, built to serve the needs ofthe abovementioned interaction model. This smart device will provide the following capabilities:

The ability for the visitors to communicate with the experts during the show and ask

questions related to the virtual world or to see the already available discussions and take

part in them. This will be based on social media. The use of social media has the added

value of making the discussions visible to all and also available even beyond the duration

of a single show, offering more in-depth information on the content of the show to the

interested visitors and acting as an information vault for future reference.

The opportunity for the users to explore and get familiar with virtual objects related to

the content of the show. This will be achieved through the use of Augmented Reality.Specifically, observing the content through the lens of the mobile device, be it something


14/38



on the provided brochure or even a real object in one of the Hellenic Cosmos

exhibitions, additional content will be provided by the device.

The main concept of the experiment is to study first of all the meaningfulness of these

extensions and, assuming a positive observation, to assess how different flavors of these

extensions, i.e. extensions built using different parameters in the EXPERIMEDIA components,are perceived by the participating users.

3.5. Component tear-downIn this section we move a step further from the abstract architecture provided above, in order to

provide links not just to the technology, but rather to the specific technological components that

will be used in the experimental facility. This tear down details the technologies that contribute

to the facility and will be examined during the experiment, and also outlines the critical

dependencies of the experiment on the work performed in the technological WPs of the project.

3.5.1.Smart devicesHaving considered the programming languages used by the different technological partners for

the components that will be loaded on the devices, a consensus has been reached on using

devices that use the Android OS. Due to availability issues (the devices initially selected were out

of stock in the Greek market and waiting for them could jeopardize the experiments time

schedule) different devices are being examined, also taking under consideration other parameters

such as price, durability, camera analysis etc.

For the connection to social media the SocialAuth component will be used.

The AR capabilities will be provided by the Metaio SDK (Free version).

3.5.2.StreamingA Video Capture Card has been acquired and successfully tested. This will be used to generate

the stream that will then be forwarded to the experts. This is installed on a standard PC with

Windows OS.

For the actual streaming the RTMP protocol for streaming video is used (Adobe Flash Media

Live Encoder)

ATOS will provide the streaming service through one of its servers

3.5.3.Experts ToolboxNo dedicated application will be developed for the experts. Instead, a collection of existing

applications will be exploited, hence the term Experts Toolbox. Specifically:

The incoming stream will be provided as a URL link for Flash video stream and viewed via a

standard browser.

The default Web interfaces will be used to interact with social media.


15/38



4. Experiment designIn the previous section we presented the enhanced services that we aim to offer to Hellenic

Cosmos visitors by using the various EXPERIMEDIA extensions that will be made available by

the project partners. In this section we will focus more on the experiment itself and discuss itsgoals and the way these goals will be pursued.

4.1. GoalsEXPERIMEDIA is a very complex and ambitious project. It combines the consideration of

multiple emerging technologies with the execution of medium to large scale experiments with

real users in real settings, and all that under tremendously tight schedules. Therefore, as is

typically the rule with highly ambitious projects, it is best if goals are set (and pursued)

progressively. With that in mind, we define here goals of different difficulty, all of which will of

course be pursued with equal eagerness to succeed.

4.1.1.Goal 1: Be an EXPERIMEDIA test bedThis being one of the embedded experiments of EXPERIMEDIA, i.e. an experiment that will be

executed very early on in the project and clearly before any of the related components have

matured, one of its goals is to test and validate the overall approach, to work as a testing bed for

the involved technologies and architecture, and to provide a working scenario to assess the

compatibility and integration of the different components.

4.1.2.Goal 2: Explore suitability of FIRE technologies for the field underexamination

Moving beyond the mere implementation and integration of the experimental facilities and into

the actual execution of the experiment, there is the question of whether all, none, or just some of

the considered EXPERIMEDIA technologies are meaningful. Therefore, one of the

experiments goals is to examine whether the selected EXPERIMEDIA toolboxes that will be

applied in Hellenic Cosmos truly have a positive impact on the services that may be offered to

the visitors.

4.1.3.Goal 3: Measure impact of FIRE technologiesBuilding on the previous comment, what is even more interesting is the ability to measure theimpact that each technology has. In other words, one of the experiments goals is to manage to

quantify the impact that the application of the EXPERIMEDIA technologies has had on the

offered experiences, with an emphasis on Quality of Experience (QoE) metrics.

4.1.4.Goal 4: Identify parameters that affect impactA further research direction of interest regards the technical characteristics of the involved

technologies. What needs to be assessed is how the different parameters of the EXPERIMEDIA

components affect the measured QoE of the end users. In other words, the final of the

experiments goals is to determine which parameters affect the way and/or degree to which the

examined technologies affect the quality of the experience that is offered to the venues visitors.


16/38



4.2. Experiment procedureThe embedded experiment will take place at the premises of Hellenic World and can be

semantically split in four, partially overlapping, phases: Preparatory, Execution, Data Acquisition

and Analysis, as follows.

4.2.1.Preparatory phaseThis is the stage where participants will be selected and prepared for the experiment. In order for

the experiments results to be most meaningful it is of course desired to have the broadest and

most representative participation of visitors. Still other issues have to be considered, as for

example our commitment not to perform experiments on minors. Therefore, in the preparatory

phase suitable candidates will be identified and asked to participate in the experiment.

The experiments goals, the overall procedure, their role in the experiment, the nature of the

gathered data, the handling of the data etc will be explain in detail to every candidate, both

aurally and in writing and a written consent will be acquired.

No information other than the note of informed consent will be gathered at this time.

4.2.2.Execution phaseThis is the phase in which the visitors that participate in the experiment will visit the Tholos as

well as the physical exhibitions of the Hellenic Cosmos and take advantage of the

EXPERIMEDIA based extensions. Those visitors that will be given a smart device (it is not

possible to provide such devices for the full number of individuals that may visit the Tholos,

especially when considering that these devices will not be used by the visitors only during the

show but also after it) will also be required to sign for them. This documentation will not be

combined with any of the experiments data and will not be maintained after the device has been

returned. All participants of the experiment will also acquire a related brochure; some elements

of the brochure will be designed specifically for use with the AR component on the smart

devices.

While in the Tholos the visitors will have the opportunity to ask questions freely about the

content they are watching, and these questions will be answered by either the museum educator

or some remote expert, in an online and real time manner. Visitors with smart devices will be

able to pose the questions directly to the experts and/or discuss them online; others will be

limited to asking the museum educator who will have the option of referring the questions to the

remote experts if needed. Based on the requests of the visitors the navigation in the virtual world

may vary considerably with respect to the standard routes typically followed in the current mode

of operation of the Tholos.

After the show in Tholos the visitors will have the opportunity to explore the other areas of the

venue. The visitors carrying the smart devices will be able to exploit additional information that

is overlaid with the use of AR technology and/or review some of the shows 3D models at wish.

Different groups of users may be asked to experience different versions on the facility, i.e.

instances of the facility where different EXPERIMEDIA modules or EXPERIMEDIA modules


17/38



with different parameters are used, in order to assess how these differences affect the users

perception of the facility.

According to D2.1.1 the execution of an EXPERIMEDIA experiment should follow two

phases:

Value Opportunity Validation and Macro Modelling Phase for the engagement of lead

users for small scale experimentation, on sample use cases which will be implemented via

the use of focus groups that will produce the model for the assessment of the experiment

roadmap

Industrialisation Assessment Phase that will test the experiment model on a bigger

sample

On the other hand it is clear that the timing of the embedded experiments does not allow for

many iterations of the experiment, as their schedule is already extremely tight, if one considers

the time at which the baseline technologies are expected to become available for use andintegration in the experimental settings of the venues.

The two phases will be implemented of course, as dictated by D2.1.1, but their role will be

slightly altered. Specifically:

The first phase will go much further than merely producing the model for the core

experiment and will aim towards tackling the first two goals of the experiment, therefore

focusing on a rough evaluation of the experiment components.

The second phase, on the other hand, will entail more extensive and detailed

experimentation as it will target the latter two goals of the experiment.

Clearly, both phases will provide queues as to whether the approach could be industrialized, i.e.

as to whether this experimental setting could become a new service provided by Hellenic

Cosmos to its paying customers. What cannot be performed in the scope of the embedded

experiment is a full scalability analysis, as it is not financially possible to provide smart devices

for everyone that may wish to use one during one day of operations.

4.2.3.Data acquisition phaseIn the data acquisition participating users will be polled for information relevant to the

experiment. As far as the users are concerned, in this experiment we identify three distinct userroles:

Visitors. These are the visitors who receive enhanced services due to the availability ofthe EXPERIMEDIA modules. The degree to which their QoE is enhanced will be the

core measure for the overall experiment.

Museum educators. Being the ones who typically interact with visitors directly, museumeducators can provide crucial feedback regarding the experience of groups that

experienced the EXPERIMEDIA version of the Tholos facility when compared to that


18/38



of the currently offered service. The way in which their own work is affected in also of

interest.

Experts. Remote experts will be the only users of one of the experiments components(the Experts Toolbox), and therefore their feedback is necessary in order to assess the

parameters that are involved in the operation of that component.

As far as the data acquisition itself is concerned, two methods will be used:

4.2.3.1. QuestionnairesQuestionnaires will be developed in order to acquire information from the participating users.

The probed information ranges from simple demographic data to information that will allow us

to assess the QoE of the users.

4.2.3.2. Focus groupsFocus groups differ from conventional survey methods such as questionnaires because they use

insight instead of rules, and have a social and not individual orientation. They also have the

benefit of translating the whole experience to words and feelings instead of numbers, which

allows the participating users to be much more expressive in their feedback. On the low side, the

unstructured nature makes it is considerably harder to process and analyse the acquired

information; therefore this approach will not be applied in an equally extensive approach as

questionnaire.

4.2.4.Analysis phaseIn the analysis phase the information gathered from the execution of the experiment will beanalysed. The offered experience will be the object of this analysis, with the measured QoE

being the observed output and the system set up, the measured technical parameters,

EXPERIMEDIA component parameters and user group population characteristics being

considered as the systems input.

The result of this analysis will be an estimation of how the followed experience as a whole and

each parameter individually affect the quality of the service offered to the end users. Although

the specifics of the analysis will be determined by the exact parameters that will be monitored (to

be later defined as has already been mentions) what can clearly be stated already is that the

analysis will be guided by the goals that have been set in the experiment. In other words, thefocus of the analysis will be to pursue the predefined goals.

4.3. Examined parametersAs has already been explained, a first parameter that will be examined is whether each of the

EPXERIMEDIA extensions is used at all. This is of course related only to the first goal that has

been set for the experiment, and it is clearly expected that the experiment will confirm that the

EXPERIMEDIA extensions enhance the provided service.

Getting into the specifics though, and as the details of the EXPERIMEDIA baseline

components are still being formed, the final list of adjustable parameters for the different


19/38



EXPERIMEDIA components is not yet known. Therefore, the exact list of parameters to be

assessed will have to be determined at a later stage and will be reported in detail in D4.3.2.

Highly possible candidates include the quality of the transmitted streams

(bandwidth/throughput, depth/analysis/frame rate for video, sampling frequency/bitrate for

audio, microphone parameters etc). Less technical but equally relevant parameters include the

duration of the show, the time provided for a free tour of the venue with a smart device, the

ratio of smart devices per participant etc.

4.4. Experiment evaluationThe fact that this is an explorative rather than validating experiment (in other words we are

looking to see what is right and not just to confirm something that we already know), it is not

possible to know beforehand which are the correct results. This of course raises the question

of how does one know whether the work has been successful and to what extent.

In order to tackle this, we define herein specific success criteria, based on the goals that have

been set for the experiment. Moreover, given the complex and challenging nature of the work

involved, we define incremental success criteria, so that we do not evaluate merely whether we

have been successful but also the degree to which we have been successful.

Based on these criteria we shall perform internal (i.e. by FHW personnel) but independent (i.e.

by personnel that is not related to the experiment) evaluations of the success of the work at

different stage; namely at the two reporting periods for the experiment, the submission times of

D4.3.2 and D4.3.3.

Based on the four goals mentioned earlier, the following degrees of success are defined.

4.4.1.Baseline successRelated goal:

Be an EXPERIMEDIA test bed

Success criteria:

The experiment can be executed. This entails having implemented the experiment

architecture, having made all of the included components operational and having beensuccessful in their integration.

Know-how has been gathered. This refers to the gathering of know-how related to the

further implementation of the embedded experiment.

4.4.2.Moderate successRelated goal:

Explore suitability of FIRE technologies for the field under examination

Success criteria:


20/38



Identify differentiation between using and not using the FIRE technologies. In other

words, we need to establish that there is a substantial difference for the visitors between

the conventional experience currently offered and the one that will be offered in the

scope of the experiment.

Classify the impact of each component as positive, negative or neutral. This is a more

specific version of the previous criterion, as here it is not enough to establish that there is

a difference. What is also required is a clear indication regarding whether this difference

has an impact that QoE of the visitors and if so whether this impact is positive or

negative.

4.4.3.SuccessRelated goal:

Measure impact of FIRE technologies.

Success criteria:

Quantify and measure QoE. In other words we need to have designed a measure that

quantifies QoE and we also need to have applied this to data gathered from the

experiment.

Correlate measured QoE to utilized FIRE technologies. Moving a step further, to meet

this criterion we should be able to identify the contribution of each component in the

QoE, so that strategic decisions can be made regarding the directions that warrant

further examination.

4.4.4.Exceptional successRelated goal:

Identify parameters that affect impact

Success criteria:

Measure QoE for different parameters. This criterion is met if data gathered when

running different instances of the experiment and different QoE values are computed.

The compared instances need to be such that a direct comparison related the differences

in QoE to differences in QoS of some kind (e.g. bitrate), differences in the design andexecution of experiment (e.g. duration of show), differences in demographics etc.

Gathered insight for the design of future experiments. This refers to the gathering of

insight related to the implementation of future EXPERIMEDIA installations at Hellenic

Cosmos, for example in order to run future experiments.


21/38



4.5. RecruitingWhen planning to run experiments with real users in real setting, the recruiting of the experiment

subjects is always a complex matter. Of course, Hellenic Cosmos boasts having more than

300.000 visitors per year. Yet, this does not necessarily imply that a similar number of potential

experiment participants are available.

First of all, for reasons that will be detailed in the following subsection, a very large portion of

these visitors are not eligible to participate in EXPERIMEDIA. Furthermore, paying visitors of

the venue have to be provided with the experience that has been guaranteed to them and not

with an experience that, as part of an on-going experiment, could go either way.

Of course this is not to say that it will be difficult to recruit subjects for the experiment. What

the above mean is that it is absolutely required to develop a recruiting strategy at this early stage,

so that the relevant risks are reduced. For our experiment we have the following plans:

4.5.1.Random visitorsThis is not the first time that Hellenic Cosmos has been used for the experiment. Quite the

contrary, Hellenic Cosmos has participated in various projects as a testbed. Experience from

these projects shows that large numbers of participants can be found in the venues random

visitors.

Specifically, the plan is to identify random visitors that seem to be eligible to participate and

simply ask them if they would be interested in that. This does not include the paying visitors that

have opted to watch the specific show, as they need to be provided with the guaranteed

experience. Therefore, the individuals that are approached have the additional incentive ofhaving free access to the experimental version of the show.

4.5.2.Organized groupsThe Foundation of the Hellenic World in itself, as well as its personnel individually, is linked to a

number of universities and other organizations. Through this links it is possible to arrange for

group visits to the venue, and to ask the members of the groups, if they so wish, to participate in

the experiment. Again, free access is an additional incentive.

4.5.3.Summer schools and other FHW activitiesFHW organizes various activities, such as summer schools, which involve large groups of people.

The experiment can be joined with these activities in a cooperative way. For example the

participation in the experiment could become an optional workshop for a relevant summer

school, with both EXPERIMEDIA and the summer school gaining from the cooperation.

4.6. ConstraintsThe main attendants of FHW shows are children and adolescents. In the EXPERIMEDIA

experiments only adults will be considered, which creates a question regarding the validity and

generality of the results.


22/38



For the same reasons, and given the fact that the navigation in a virtual world is a group

experience, it will not be possible to apply some monitoring techniques (for example video

recording), unless if the experiment is executed only when pure groups of participants are

present, i.e. when there is no one present who is either not eligible or has not agreed to

participate in the experiment.

Regarding the experiment timeline, since a lot of the real exhibits connected to tags in the virtual

content are in open areas of the Hellenic Cosmos venue, the weather may have a crucial impact

on the execution of the experiment. Therefore, an effort will be made for the actual experiment

to be organised and implemented not after October 2012, as by that time the weather conditions

will not be stable enough to permit for an unobstructed execution. This is also in line with the

deadline foreseen for the first reporting of the experiment in November (D4.3.2). Every effort

will be made to gather as much data as possible in this stage, so that the analysis required for the

second stage of reporting (D4.3.3) can go ahead regardless of the weather conditions.

On the other hand, the execution of the experiment is also constrained in a much more

definitive way by the timeline of the development of EXPERIMEDIA components by the

technological partners of the project.


23/38



5. Experimental facility implementationThis section describes the design of the infrastructure that will be developed and used in order to

enable the experiment in question. As will be seen in the following, the development of this

infrastructure encompasses the utilization of already existing FHW facilities and infrastructure,the utilization of components developed by the technical partners of EPXERIMEDIA, the

development of new software components by FHW as well as the integration of all the above

into a seamless basis for experimentation. In the following we start by presenting the overall

architecture of the experimentation infrastructure and continue with a discussion of the

requirements for its implementation and the associated risks

5.1. System architecture

Figure 3. Flow of information and component diagram for the experiment.

Expert VisitorEducator

FHW FACILITIES

TholosDome

Theater

ExpertsToolbox NavigationControl MobileApplication

USERS

Video Stream ServersSocial Media

Experimenter

Monitoring ServiceEXPERIMEDIA FACILITIES


24/38



In this figure we can see that the museum educator holds the navigation control, which specifies

the content that should be displayed to the visitors. Based on this input, the cluster in the Tholos

dome processes the loaded 3D world in order to render the according location and viewpoint

and display it to the visitors in the dome. This is the part that was already supported before

EXPERIMEDIA and it is in fact the typical scenario for the utilization of the Tholos.

With the EXPERIMEDIA extensions, the Tholos system, in addition to the local projections,

also forwards the rendered stream (actually a downsized and 2D version of it) to the video

stream server, which in turn makes it available to the Experts' Toolbox. In this way the experts

will be aware of the presented content in real time. The video stream from Tholos is captured

from another PC through a video capture card (AVERMEDIA Game Broadcaster HD). At this

PC the video is transcoded along with the audio feed from the educators microphone and are

transmitted using Adobes Flash Live Encoding to ATOS Server. The Experts will be using

ATOS Flash Player to visualize the video stream.

The FHW mobile application will integrate the ICCS SocialAuth in order to facilitate visitors

access to social media. On the other hand the experts will be accessing the social media via the

standard Web interfaces. In this way their communication will be public and available to all

interested parties even after the show ends.

Furthermore we will integrate the Metaio Free SDK to achieve augmented reality on the mobile

devices.

Finally, at all times of the experiment execution various system parameters are monitored in an

automated manner by the EXPERIMEDIA monitoring service.


25/38



Figure 4. Flow of information and component diagram for the experiment.

Experts

Toolbox

Visitor

Question

Mobile App

using the

SocialAuth

API

Social Media

Servers

Web BrowserExpert's

Answer

Video

Streaming

Server

Adobe Flash

Media Live

Encoder

Educator

Voice

Video Feed

from Dome

Video Capture

Machine

Real-TimeRender Farm

for Dome

DomeProjectors

(final image

for visitors)

NavigationControl

Educator

Commands

(joystick)

ATOS FlashPlayer

Expert's

PC Screen


26/38



Figure 5. Flow of information when using the visitors augmented reality mobile application.

5.1.1.The architecture in the scope of the experimentMobile Application

Collaborative presentation application:The visitors will supply their social media credentials and will then connect to specific

common for the show channels. The application will allow them to post text and photos

and of course receive all the channels communication.

Augmented reality application:

The second functionality of the mobile application will be using the utilising the Metaio

free SDK to support augmented reality. The user will be using the camera of his mobile

device in order to see true 3d models in specific locations or leaflets at the premises of

Hellenic World through the use of marker tracking.

Experts Toolbox

The experts toolbox will provide a flash component that will allow them to view the

streamed content. The streamed image will be accompanied with the audio from the

microphone of the educator. Another toolbox component will offer them social media

connectivity to the specified common channels of communication (as mentioned above)

and will allow them to interact through messaging with the visitors attending the show.

Evaluation

As we have already mentioned the mobile application will be directly interacting with the

FIRE application of EXPERIMEDIA. During the execution of the experiment system

parameters will be monitored and logged.

5.2. RequirementsAs can be seen from the previous section, the technological infrastructure that will be utilized in

this experiment is quite complex. As a result, it is only natural that a number of requirements are

associated with its successful implementation. We discuss the most important ones below.

5.2.1.Requirements on the FHW facilityAs has already been explained, a number of existing FHW facility components will be utilized.These include the VR content that will be displayed in the Tholos, the Tholos dome and Tholos

Video Feed of

the real world

Mobile App

using

Metaio SDK

Video Feed of

the real world

+

Virtual

Objects

Reality Augmented Reality


27/38



cluster for the projection and rendering of the VR content respectively, and the network via

which these components will interact with the remote EXPERIMEDIA components as well as

with the mobile devices. In order for these to be suitable for use in the scope of the experiment,

the following requirements are in place:

VR content

The 3D content currently available is not semantically annotated. The documentation

about the content is available and it is quite extensive, but it is not aligned with the

content. In other words, although extensive texts are available that discuss each element

in the 3D content, there is no automated way to relate each piece of text with a specific

item in the content. In order for the tagging part of the experiment to be enabled, these

annotations will have to be made available.

Tholos dome and cluster

The Tholos system has been designed with sole purpose to render 3D worlds in real

time. The designed experiment also requires the transmission of synchronized metadata

and therefore the Tholos system will have to be altered. This creates the requirement for

testing time on the Tholos system, as well as for the ability to support different instances

of the system, as the original system will have to remain in operation during the

execution of the experiments, since it constitutes a major part of the Hellenic Cosmos

operation model and cannot be unavailable during Hellenic Cosmos working hours.

Network

Network availability is crucial and network speed needs to be sufficient for the described

tasks. The specific metrics that constitute sufficient network resources will be specified

based on the requirements set by the partners developing the components in question.

5.2.2.Required components by FHW (development)Recording and Streaming Software Component

As described previously the experiment will require a Video Capture Card and specific

software for the encoding/streaming of the captured content presented at the Tholos

facility.

Experts Toolbox

The board of experts uses a set of tools to playback the stream from the Streaming

Server and to access the Social Media in order to communicate both ways with the

audience.

5.2.3.Requirements for input from EXPERIMEDIA partnersStreaming server


28/38



The board of experts as described above may consist of many individuals each of which

may be located further away in a different location. Since the FHW networking facilities

cannot support such bandwidth requirements, the user of a dedicated stream server is

necessary. The server will receive the source stream from the FHW facilities and will be

responsible for the retransmission to the experts application. The EXPERIMEDIA

facility will have to provide this Server, the requirements on the format expected and all

the required credentials needed for the establishment of communication.

Monitoring service

In order to evaluate the user experience and to be able to track detailed info about the

network statistics and the quality of service, a monitoring service is mandatory.

5.3. Content lifecycleThe FHW personnel create all the content that is presented during the show at the Tholos

installation. The FHWs personnel also generate the multimedia content presented to the

audiences mobile application. The video stream that is presented to the experts is generated

dynamically from the FHWs software (EVS Enhanced Visualization Engine).

The assets needed for the Tholos Virtual Reality show are stored at servers of FHW. The 3d

models that will be presented to the mobile application will be stored on the mobile devices.

The Virtual Reality application shown at Tholos is handled from FHWs software while FHWs

servers transmit the content. The video stream is delivered to the experts from

EXPERIMEDIAs servers.


29/38



6. Ethics, privacy, PIAEXPERIMEDIA will conduct research with human participants and is, in particular, interested

in human behaviour and experience with Future Internet technologies to understand how to

provide meaningful collective experiences to individuals and society. Given that participants insocial and networked media research should have confidence in the experimenters, good

research will only be possible if there is mutual respect and confidence between experimenters

and participants. As some areas of human experience and behaviour may be beyond the reach of

experiments, observation or other form of investigation and may raise ethical considerations,

EXPERIMEDIA will provide an ethics management process that incorporates ethical and data

protection review of experiments.

Appropriate management of ethical issues will be guaranteed by the project management

through a mixture of measures to ensure the right technical, physical and administrative

environment. The project identified an ethical issues coordinator, as well as a data protectioncoordinator, which will be incorporated within the overall project management structure.

Additionally, an Ethics Advisory Board (EAB) and Data Protection Board (DPB) have been

created. The EAB will advise the EXPERIMEDIA consortium on ethical, privacy and data

protection issues. The DPB is responsible for ensuring that EXPERIMEDIA is compliant with

data protection requirements and that the technical partners develop a system that considers

privacy.

These are described in more detail in D5.1.1, which also includes the results of extensive work

towards the establishment of guidelines that should be followed in the experiments, in order to

ensure compliance with ethical requirements and respect for the privacy of those involved in the

experiments.

In addition to that, D5.1.2 identifies points that specifically the FHW embedded experiment

should consider and D2.1.1 details the Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) methodology that

should be followed by all EXPERIMEDIA experiments.

In the following we elaborate on how these have been considered and incorporated specifically

in the design of this embedded experiment. Given the overlapping nature of the topics and the

documents, there may be some repetition of concepts. We keep it in the text by choice, in order

to also maintain the point by point reference to the above documents.

6.1. Minimum ethical principlesIn D5.1.1 a set of ethical principles has been identified for the embedded experiments. They

have all been considered in the design of this embedded experiment, as explained in the

following.

6.1.1.Doing goodThe experiment assesses the added value provided to end users by the extension of the Tholos

infrastructure via exploitation of the EXPERIMEDIA technology. Therefore it does goodboth for those participating in the experiment as well as in general.


30/38



As far as the participants of the experiment are concerned, they will have the opportunity to

benefit from enhanced services that were previously unavailable. In the more general sense, this

experiment will be a first step towards making these technologies a part of the normal operation

of the Tholos, so that more people can benefit from them in the future.

6.1.2.Doing no harmAlthough people working in EXPERIMEDIA will be monitoring closely the execution of the

experiment in all stages in order to analyse every relevant piece of information that becomes

available, the actual navigation in the virtual worlds will still be performed by the properly trained

personnel who do that task in the conventional Tholos shows. Their training and expertise

guarantees the quality of the experience that will be provided to all participating user groups.

For general public the Tholos is meant to provide a feeling of what it was like to live in another

era, which will be achieved for the groups of the experiment as well. For a special case of

visitors, though, there is a different goal: the students and pupils that visit the Tholos are mainlymeant to receive assistance in their history courses. No harm will be done in this direction either,

as these user groups are not considered as eligible participants for the experiment.

6.1.3.Risk managementAs the experiment design is being formulated, and later on as the experiment will be executed,

risks will be constantly analysed, evaluated and treated, in the same sense as in D1.1.2. In the

experiments risk register, two types of risks are identified: risks for the participants and risks for

the experiment itself. In the context of ethical oversight of the experiment of course, it is the

former that is of core interest.

The current instance of the risk register for the participants is displayed in Table 1.

As can be seen all identified risks have been treated with the AVOID option. In fact this is a

strategic choice for the experiment: risks for the participants will be avoided, even if that moves

the risk to the experiment itself. In this manner we can be assured that the participants of the

experimenters will not be facing any risks.

6.1.4.ConsentThe preparatory phase of the experiment involves the explicit communication of any relevant

information to the eligible participants (i.e. what the experiment is about, what it entails, which istheir role, etc). Only those eligible participants that have agreed and will sign a note of informed

consent will be considered in the experiment. This consent will have a predetermined duration

and will be revocable at any time.

6.1.5.ConfidentialityDuring the experiment only the required data will be gathered, this data will only be made

available to the individuals that are needed to process that data and no part of this data will be

disclosed to any third parties. Gathered data will be anonymised to the degree that this is allowed

by the nature of the experiment. All data will be purged after the analysis has been completed.


31/38



6.1.6.Data protectionWe will follow a rigorous data protection plan, as can be seen in the following sections.

6.2. Ethical oversight principlesD5.1.1 has also produced a more detailed set of ethical principles, more customized to thespecifics of EXPERIMEDIA and the embedded experiments. These have also been considered

and adopted in the design of the experiment, as seen in the following.

6.2.1.Informed consentAll participants will be informed of the research objectives and all aspects of the research that

might reasonably be expected to influence willingness to participate. We will explain all other

aspects of the research about which the participants enquire. This will be done in the preparatory

phase of the experiment, before participants are asked to join the experiment, so their decision

will constitute informed consent.

We will make sure that participants do not feel pressured to take part in the experiment.

There will not be any payments to participants. Incentive mechanisms used may include the offer

of free passes for Hellenic Cosmos exhibitions. This does not put visitors that accept to

participate in any higher risk than that of visitors who do not participate and pay for their passes

for the exhibitions.

6.2.2.DeceptionWe will never intentionally deceive, mislead or withhold information from participants over the

purpose and general nature of the investigation.

6.2.3.Data collectionWe will collect some personal data about participants during the experiment (for example

demographics). We will provide participants with any information to complete their

understanding of the nature of the research. We will discuss with the participants their

experience in order to monitor any unforeseen negative effects or misconceptions, in the scope

of the focus groups.

We will adopt a principle of data minimisation: only the necessary information will be collected

and processed and the information will be stored only for as long as is necessary. It is not

possible not to record specific individuals during the experiment, as we will need to keep track of

the individuals that have the EXPERIMEDIA devices in their possession, but we will anonymise

the data when the devices are returned at the end of each session of the experiment.

User profiles will only be stored when the consent of the users is acquired and only for the

purpose and lifetime of corresponding experiments session. There will be no commercial

exploitation of user profiles.


32/38



6.2.4.Withdrawal from the investigationWe will make it plain to participants that they have the right to withdraw from the research at

any time, irrespective of whether some incentive has been offered and accepted. The participants

will also have the right to withdraw retrospectively any consent given, and to require that their

own data be destroyed.

6.2.5.Observational researchThe experiment will be run in Tholos, which is used by user groups. In order to avoid observing

individuals that have not given their consent for this, we will try to run the experiments only with

pure groups, i.e. with groups that contain only people that have agreed to participate in the

project.

In any case observing in the context of this experiment does not include any kind of recording

and is limited to observing group dynamics during the show. This is something that is done in

the Tholos irrespective of the experiment, as the museum educator that is coordinating the showis always observing the groups response and adapts the navigation accordingly.

If the technological choice is made to use audio in order to interact with the experts, then only

the rooms general sounds will be recorded and not each individual separately. In any case, this

will only be allowed for the pure EXPERIMEDIA groups.

6.2.6.Data protection regulationAll personal data will be captured and processed according to the applicable data protection

provisions, such as Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the

processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, including Article 29

Working Party 8/2010 opinion, and Directive 2002/58 on Privacy and Electronic

Communications) and the Greek data protection legislation that may be applicable.

This will be investigated in more detail when the comprehensive list of considered information

items has been finalized.

6.2.7.Consortium partner responsibilityBe sharing this early version of the experiment description with the consortium we invite our

partners to participate in the ethical review of our plans. As the experiment design progresses we

will update this document and again share with our partners accordingly.

Our partners are of course also invited to monitor the experiment either for the sake of acquiring

a better of the operation of the technical components they have provided or simply for their

information. Any concern that they may have at that time will be considered and treated

accordingly.

6.3. Points to consider in the FHW embedded experimentRegarding the notes in D512, p13, we will not create a schedule of movies on a website, and

therefore this is not a relevant concern. Also, the Tholos movie will only be available to those


33/38



present and the experts via a URL known only to them. The general public will not have access

to it.

Regarding the note in D512, p22, FHW holds the copyright that allows for the content to be

used in the experiment

6.4. PIA6.4.1.PIA phase 1

The EXPERIMEDIA structure provides for the external review of the PIA. One such cycle has

been performed successfully at the latest General Assembly, where the experiments PIA was

presented. A second level will follow as this text will also be submitted to the EAB for review.

6.4.2.PIA phase 2Question 1. Is personal data being processed?

No personal data is processed.

Question 2. Is data linked to a natural person?

The participants name will only be logged for those individuals who are given a device. This will

be done on a form that is only used to track the devices and will be perished when device is

returned. Only data that is explicitly provided by the individuals themselves through

questionnaires and focus groups will be processed in the experiment, whilst the devices will not

hold any data. In order to make sure of this, devices will be reset when they are returned and

before given to another user, so that no data may remain by accident or mistake. Therefore

direct identification will not be possible.

Indirect identification of participants on the other hand depends on the homogeneity of

participants. In order to make sure there is no risk of indirect identification we will avoid detailed

demographics. On a second level, in the rare event where elements are identified that may fine

partitions in the sample of participants, these elements will be removed from the stored

information or they will be merged into larger groups. Therefore indirect identification will not

be possible.

Consequently, no further PIA is required. Nevertheless, written and revocable consent of

specified duration will be acquired and a detailed definition of roles will be performed with an

emphasis on the role of data controller.


34/38



7. RisksAs the experiment design is being formulated, and later on as the experiment will be executed,

risks will be constantly analysed, evaluated and treated, in the same sense as in D1.1.2. In the

experiments risk register, two types of risks are identified: risks for the participants and risks forthe experiment itself. In the context of ethical oversight of the experiment of course, it is the

former that is of core interest.

The current instance of the risk register for the participants contains the following items:

7.1. Risks for the participantsTable 1. Risk register for the participants.

ID Description Probability Impact Proximity Response Comment

P1 Mobile devicedamaged during theinstallation of themobile application

low high Executionphase

avoid Instead of using theparticipants owndevices, the projectwill supply the mobiledevices that will beused during theexperiment.

P2 Mobile device notcompatible with theEXPERIMEDIAsoftware

high high Executionphase

avoid See point P1

P3 Malicious softwareinstalled on themobile device


avoid See point P1

P4 Participants feelpressured toparticipate in theexperiment

low high Preparatoryphase

avoid This is true particularlyfor members ofgroups who visit FHWfacilities as part of anagreement between.We will make it clearto all during thepreparatory phase that

participation is not arequirement and hasnot affect.

As has already been explained, it is our priority not to put participants in any risk. Therefore

participant risks are treated with the AVOID option, where applicable. This often has the result

of moving the risk from the participants to the experiment. For example, P1 above was avoided

by not using the participants own devices. This has had as a result the generation of risk E3

bellow, where we are considering the case of damaged mobile devices that are owned by FHW

and are needed in order to run the experiments.


35/38



7.2. Risks for the experimentTable 2. Risk register for the experiment.

ID Description Probability Impact Proximity Response Comment

E1 Requiredexperiments cannotbe run because 90%of thee visitors arechildren andadolescents and theagreed EthicalOversight Measuresstate we will not bedealing withchildren

high high Preparatoryphase

reduce The core concern isthat the eligibleparticipants that willbe visiting the HellenicCosmos facilities willnot be sufficient innumber at the time ofthe execution of theexperiment. In orderto avoid this we arealready 1) organizingparallel activities thatwill ensure thepresence of widenumbers of adults and2) we are workingclosely withuniversities in order toorganizeundergraduate andgraduate student visitsthat will be combinedwith the experiment.

E2 Required

EXPERIMEDIAcomponents notavailable on time ornot compatible withthe FHW facilities

low high Experiment

design

reduce Via close coordination

with the consortiumpartners

E3 Damaged mobiledevices


fall-back We will run theexperiment with asmany working devicesare available. Themobile devices onlyaffect one part of the

experiment, andtherefore the feedbackof participants that arenot given a device isstill relevant

E4 Weather does notpermit the use ofoutdoors locations

low low Executionphase

reduce We are planning toexecute theexperiments at a timethat the weather

D4.3.1 FHW Experiment Design and Plan v1.0

Documents

Transcript of D4.3.1 FHW Experiment Design and Plan v1.0