annotate docs/WAC2016/WAC2016.tex @ 1957:ba581dc15ac6

Major update to Introduction, commenting out parts to get layout
author Nicholas Jillings <nickjillings@users.noreply.github.com>
date Wed, 14 Oct 2015 16:02:45 +0100
parents b3886a4cc3e7
children ac51271a1a77
rev   line source
b@1481 1 \documentclass{sig-alternate}
b@1950 2 \usepackage{hyperref} % make links (like references, links to Sections, ...) clickable
b@1950 3 \usepackage{enumitem} % tighten itemize etc by appending '[noitemsep,nolistsep]'
me@1952 4 \usepackage{cleveref}
b@1481 5
b@1481 6 \begin{document}
b@1481 7
b@1481 8 % Copyright
b@1481 9 \setcopyright{waclicense}
b@1481 10
b@1481 11
b@1481 12 %% DOI
b@1481 13 %\doi{10.475/123_4}
b@1481 14 %
b@1481 15 %% ISBN
b@1481 16 %\isbn{123-4567-24-567/08/06}
b@1481 17 %
b@1481 18 %%Conference
b@1481 19 %\conferenceinfo{PLDI '13}{June 16--19, 2013, Seattle, WA, USA}
b@1481 20 %
b@1481 21 %\acmPrice{\$15.00}
b@1481 22
b@1481 23 %
b@1481 24 % --- Author Metadata here ---
b@1481 25 \conferenceinfo{Web Audio Conference WAC-2016,}{April 4--6, 2016, Atlanta, USA}
b@1481 26 \CopyrightYear{2016} % Allows default copyright year (20XX) to be over-ridden - IF NEED BE.
b@1481 27 %\crdata{0-12345-67-8/90/01} % Allows default copyright data (0-89791-88-6/97/05) to be over-ridden - IF NEED BE.
b@1481 28 % --- End of Author Metadata ---
b@1481 29
b@1951 30 \title{Web Audio Evaluation Tool: A framework for subjective assessment of audio}
b@1481 31 %\subtitle{[Extended Abstract]
b@1481 32 %\titlenote{A full version of this paper is available as
b@1481 33 %\textit{Author's Guide to Preparing ACM SIG Proceedings Using
b@1481 34 %\LaTeX$2_\epsilon$\ and BibTeX} at
b@1481 35 %\texttt{www.acm.org/eaddress.htm}}}
b@1481 36 %
b@1481 37 % You need the command \numberofauthors to handle the 'placement
b@1481 38 % and alignment' of the authors beneath the title.
b@1481 39 %
b@1481 40 % For aesthetic reasons, we recommend 'three authors at a time'
b@1481 41 % i.e. three 'name/affiliation blocks' be placed beneath the title.
b@1481 42 %
b@1481 43 % NOTE: You are NOT restricted in how many 'rows' of
b@1481 44 % "name/affiliations" may appear. We just ask that you restrict
b@1481 45 % the number of 'columns' to three.
b@1481 46 %
b@1481 47 % Because of the available 'opening page real-estate'
b@1481 48 % we ask you to refrain from putting more than six authors
b@1481 49 % (two rows with three columns) beneath the article title.
b@1481 50 % More than six makes the first-page appear very cluttered indeed.
b@1481 51 %
b@1481 52 % Use the \alignauthor commands to handle the names
b@1481 53 % and affiliations for an 'aesthetic maximum' of six authors.
b@1481 54 % Add names, affiliations, addresses for
b@1481 55 % the seventh etc. author(s) as the argument for the
b@1481 56 % \additionalauthors command.
b@1481 57 % These 'additional authors' will be output/set for you
b@1481 58 % without further effort on your part as the last section in
b@1481 59 % the body of your article BEFORE References or any Appendices.
b@1481 60
b@1948 61 % FIVE authors instead of four, to leave space between first two authors.
me@1944 62 \numberofauthors{5} % in this sample file, there are a *total*
b@1481 63 % of EIGHT authors. SIX appear on the 'first-page' (for formatting
b@1481 64 % reasons) and the remaining two appear in the \additionalauthors section.
b@1481 65 %
b@1481 66 \author{
b@1481 67 % You can go ahead and credit any number of authors here,
b@1481 68 % e.g. one 'row of three' or two rows (consisting of one row of three
b@1481 69 % and a second row of one, two or three).
b@1481 70 %
b@1481 71 % The command \alignauthor (no curly braces needed) should
b@1481 72 % precede each author name, affiliation/snail-mail address and
b@1481 73 % e-mail address. Additionally, tag each line of
b@1481 74 % affiliation/address with \affaddr, and tag the
b@1481 75 % e-mail address with \email.
b@1481 76 %
b@1481 77 % 1st. author
b@1481 78 \alignauthor Nicholas Jillings\\
b@1481 79 \email{n.g.r.jillings@se14.qmul.ac.uk}
b@1948 80 % dummy author for nicer spacing
b@1948 81 \alignauthor
b@1481 82 % 2nd. author
b@1481 83 \alignauthor Brecht De Man\\
b@1481 84 \email{b.deman@qmul.ac.uk}
b@1481 85 \and % use '\and' if you need 'another row' of author names
b@1481 86 % 3rd. author
b@1481 87 \alignauthor David Moffat\\
b@1481 88 \email{d.j.moffat@qmul.ac.uk}
b@1481 89 % 4th. author
b@1481 90 \alignauthor Joshua D. Reiss\\
b@1481 91 \email{joshua.reiss@qmul.ac.uk}
b@1948 92 \and % new line for address
b@1481 93 \affaddr{Centre for Digital Music}\\
b@1481 94 \affaddr{School of Electronic Engineering and Computer Science}\\
b@1481 95 \affaddr{Queen Mary University of London}\\
b@1481 96 \affaddr{Mile End Road,}
b@1481 97 \affaddr{London E1 4NS}\\
b@1481 98 \affaddr{United Kingdom}\\
b@1481 99 }
b@1481 100 %Centre for Digital Music, School of Electronic Engineering and Computer Science, Queen Mary University of London
b@1481 101 %% 5th. author
b@1481 102 %\alignauthor Sean Fogarty\\
b@1481 103 % \affaddr{NASA Ames Research Center}\\
b@1481 104 % \affaddr{Moffett Field}\\
b@1481 105 % \email{fogartys@amesres.org}
b@1481 106 %% 6th. author
b@1481 107 %\alignauthor Charles Palmer\\
b@1481 108 % \affaddr{Palmer Research Laboratories}\\
b@1481 109 % \affaddr{8600 Datapoint Drive}\\
b@1481 110 % \email{cpalmer@prl.com}
b@1481 111 %}
b@1481 112 % There's nothing stopping you putting the seventh, eighth, etc.
b@1481 113 % author on the opening page (as the 'third row') but we ask,
b@1481 114 % for aesthetic reasons that you place these 'additional authors'
b@1481 115 % in the \additional authors block, viz.
b@1481 116 %\additionalauthors{Additional authors: John Smith (The Th{\o}rv{\"a}ld Group,
b@1481 117 %email: {\texttt{jsmith@affiliation.org}}) and Julius P.~Kumquat
b@1481 118 %(The Kumquat Consortium, email: {\texttt{jpkumquat@consortium.net}}).}
b@1481 119 \date{1 October 2015}
b@1481 120 % Just remember to make sure that the TOTAL number of authors
b@1481 121 % is the number that will appear on the first page PLUS the
b@1481 122 % number that will appear in the \additionalauthors section.
b@1481 123
b@1481 124 \maketitle
b@1481 125 \begin{abstract}
b@1481 126 Here comes the abstract.
b@1481 127 \end{abstract}
b@1481 128
b@1481 129
b@1481 130 \section{Introduction}
b@1949 131
b@1949 132 % Listening tests/perceptual audio evaluation: what are they, why are they important
b@1949 133 % As opposed to limited scope of WAC15 paper: also musical features, realism of sound effects / sound synthesis, performance of source separation and other algorithms...
nickjillings@1957 134 Perceptual evaluation of audio, in the form of listening tests, is a powerful way to assess anything from audio codec quality over realism of sound synthesis to the performance of source separation, automated music production and other auditory evaluations.
b@1949 135 In less technical areas, the framework of a listening test can be used to measure emotional response to music or test cognitive abilities. % maybe some references? If there's space.
b@1949 136
b@1950 137 % check out http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10055-015-0270-8 - only paper that cited WAC15 paper
b@1950 138
nickjillings@1957 139 % Why difficult? Challenges? What constitutes a good interface?
nickjillings@1957 140 % Technical, interfaces, user friendliness, reliability
nickjillings@1957 141 There are multiple programs for performing perceptual listening tests, as can be seen in Table \ref{tab:toolboxes}. Some are designed to have only one interface type or only work using proprietary software. The Web Audio Evaluation Toolbox is different as it does not require proprietary software and provides many interface and test types in one, common environment. Note that the design of an effective listening test further poses many challenges unrelated to interface design, which are beyond the scope of this paper \cite{bech}.
b@1949 142
b@1949 143 % Why in the browser?
nickjillings@1957 144 Web Audio API has important features for performing perceptual tests including sample level manipulation of audio streams \cite{schoeffler2015mushra}, synchronous playback and flexible playback. Being in the browser also allows leveraging the flexible object oriented JavaScript format and native support for web documents, such as the extensible markup language (XML) which is used for configuration and test results. Using the web also simplifies test deployment to requiring a basic web server with advanced functionality such as test collection and automatic processing using PHP. As recruiting participants can be very time-consuming, and as for some tests a large number of participants is needed, browser-based tests \cite{schoeffler2015mushra}. However, to our knowledge, no tool currently exists that allows the creation of a remotely accessible listening test. BeaqleJS \cite{beaqlejs} also operates in the browser, however BeaqleJS does not make use of the Web Audio API.%requires programming knowledge?...
b@1948 145
b@1948 146 % only browser-based?
me@1952 147 \begin{table*}[ht]
b@1954 148 \caption{Table with existing listening test platforms and their features}
b@1954 149 \begin{center}
b@1954 150 \begin{tabular}{|*{6}{l|}}
b@1954 151 \hline
b@1954 152 \textbf{Name} & \textbf{Ref.} & \textbf{Language} & \textbf{Interfaces} & \textbf{Remote} & \textbf{All UI} \\
b@1954 153 \hline
b@1954 154 APE & \cite{ape} & MATLAB & multi-stimulus, 1 axis per attribute & & \\
b@1954 155 BeaqleJS & \cite{beaqlejs} & JavaScript & ABX, MUSHRA & (not natively supported) & \\
b@1954 156 HULTI-GEN & \cite{hultigen} & MAX & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 157 mushraJS & \footnote{https://github.com/akaroice/mushraJS} & JavaScript & MUSHRA & \checkmark & \\
b@1954 158 MUSHRAM & \cite{mushram} & MATLAB & MUSHRA & & \\
b@1954 159 Scale & \cite{scale} & MATLAB & & & \\
b@1954 160 WhisPER & \cite{whisper} & MATLAB & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 161 \textbf{WAET} & \cite{waet} & JavaScript & \textbf{all of the above} & \checkmark & \checkmark \\
b@1954 162 \hline
b@1954 163 \end{tabular}
b@1954 164 \end{center}
b@1954 165 \label{tab:toolboxes}
b@1954 166 \end{table*}%
b@1954 167
b@1954 168 \begin{table*}[ht]
b@1954 169 \caption{Table with interfaces and which toolboxes support them}
b@1954 170 \begin{center}
b@1954 171 \begin{tabular}{|*{5}{l|}}
b@1954 172 \hline
b@1954 173 \textbf{Interface} & \textbf{HULTI-GEN} & \textbf{Scale} & \textbf{WhisPER} & \textbf{WAET} \\
b@1954 174 \hline
b@1954 175 MUSHRA (ITU-R BS. 1534) & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 176 Rank scale & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 177 Likert scale & \checkmark & & \checkmark & \checkmark \\
b@1954 178 ABC/HR (ITU-R BS. 1116) & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 179 -50 to 50 Bipolar with Ref & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 180 Absolute Category Rating (ACR) Scale & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 181 Degredation Category Rating (DCR) Scale & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 182 Comparison Category Rating (CCR) Scale & \checkmark & & \checkmark & \checkmark \\
b@1954 183 9 Point Hedonic Category Rating Scale & \checkmark & & \checkmark & \checkmark \\
b@1954 184 ITU-R 5 Point Continuous Impairment Scale & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 185 Pairwise Comparison (Better/Worse) & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 186 APE style & & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 187 Multi attribute ratings & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 188 AB Test & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 189 ABX Test & \checkmark & & & \checkmark \\
b@1954 190 ``Adaptive psychophysical methods'' & & & \checkmark & \\
b@1954 191 Repertory Grid Technique (RGT) & & & \checkmark & \\
b@1954 192 (Semantic differential) & & & (\checkmark) & \\ % same as a few of the above
b@1954 193 \hline
b@1954 194 \end{tabular}
b@1954 195 \end{center}
nickjillings@1957 196 \label{tab:toolbox_interfaces}
b@1954 197 \end{table*}%
b@1948 198
b@1948 199 %
nickjillings@1957 200 %Selling points: remote tests, visualisaton, create your own test in the browser, many interfaces, few/no dependencies, flexibility
b@1949 201
b@1949 202 [Talking about what we do in the various sections of this paper. Referring to \cite{waet}. ]
nickjillings@1957 203 \begin{comment}
b@1951 204 % MEETING 8 OCTOBER
b@1951 205 \subsection{Meeting 8 October}
b@1951 206 \begin{itemize}
b@1951 207 \item Do we manipulate audio?\\
b@1951 208 \begin{itemize}
b@1951 209 \item Add loudness equalisation? (test\_create.html) Tag with gains.
b@1951 210 \item Add volume slider?
b@1951 211 \item Cross-fade (in interface node): default 0, number of seconds
b@1951 212 \item Also: we use the playback buffer to present metrics of which portion is listened to
b@1951 213 \end{itemize}
b@1951 214 \item Logging system information: whichever are possible (justify others)
b@1951 215 \item Input streams as audioelements
b@1951 216 \item Capture microphone to estimate loudness (especially Macbook)
b@1951 217 \item Test page (in-built oscillators): left-right calibration, ramp up test tone until you hear it; optional compensating EQ (future work implementing own filters) --> Highlight issues!
b@1951 218 \item Record IP address (PHP function, grab and append to XML file)
b@1951 219 \item Expand anchor/reference options
b@1951 220 \item AB / ABX
b@1951 221 \end{itemize}
b@1951 222
b@1951 223 \subsubsection{Issues}
b@1951 224 \begin{itemize}
b@1951 225 \item Filters not consistent (Nick to test across browsers)
b@1951 226 \item Playback audiobuffers need to be destroyed and rebuilt each time
b@1951 227 \item Can't get channel data, hardware input/output...
b@1951 228 \end{itemize}
nickjillings@1957 229 \end{comment}
b@1948 230
b@1949 231 \section{Architecture} % title? 'back end'? % NICK
nickjillings@1953 232 WAET utilises the Web Audio API for audio playback and uses a sparse subset of the Web Audio API functionality, however the performance of WAET comes directly from the Web Audio API. Listening tests can convey large amounts of information other than obtaining the perceptual relationship between the audio fragments. WAET specifically can obtain which parts of the audio fragments were listened to and when, at what point in the audio stream did the participant switch to a different fragment and what new rating did they give a fragment. Therefore it is possible to not only evaluate the perceptual research question but also evaluate if the participant performed the test well and therefore if their results are representative or should be discarded as an outlier.
nickjillings@1953 233
nickjillings@1953 234 One of the key initial design parameters for WAET is to make the tool as open as possible to non-programmers and to this end the tool has been designed in such a way that all of the user modifiable options are included in a single XML document. This document is loaded up automatically by the web page and the JavaScript code parses and loads any extra resources required to create the test.
nickjillings@1953 235
nickjillings@1953 236 The specification document also contains the URL of the audio fragments for each test page. These fragments are downloaded asynchronously and decoded offline by the Web Audio offline decoder. The resulting buffers are assigned to a custom Audio Objects node which tracks the fragment buffer, the playback bufferSourceNode, the XML information including its unique test ID, the interface object(s) associated with the fragment and any metric or data collection objects. The Audio Object is controlled by an over-arching custom Audio Context node (not to be confused with the Web Audio Context), this parent JS Node allows for session wide control of the Audio Objects including starting and stopping playback of specific nodes.
nickjillings@1953 237
nickjillings@1953 238 The only issue with this model is the bufferNode in the Web Audio API, which is implemented as a 'use once' object which, once the buffer has been played, the buffer must be discarded as it cannot be instructed to play the buffer again. Therefore on each start request the buffer object must be created and then linked with the stored bufferSourceNode. This is an odd behaviour for such a simple object which has no alternative except to use the HTML5 audio element, however they do not have the ability to synchronously start on a given time and therefore not suited.
nickjillings@1953 239
nickjillings@1953 240 The media files supported depend on the browser level support for the initial decoding of information and is the same as the browser support for the HTML5 audio element. Therefore the most widely supported media file is the wave (.WAV) format which can be accpeted by every browser supporting the Web Audio API. The next best supported audio only formats are MP3 and AAC (in MP4) which are supported by all major browsers, Firefox relies on OS decoders and therefore its support is predicated by the OS support.
nickjillings@1953 241
nickjillings@1953 242 All the collected session data is returned in an XML document structured similarly to the configuration document, where test pages contain the audio elements with their trace collection, results, comments and any other interface-specific data points.
nickjillings@1953 243
b@1481 244 A slightly technical overview of the system. Talk about XML, JavaScript, Web Audio API, HTML5.
b@1948 245 Describe and/or visualise audioholder-audioelement-... structure.
b@1948 246
b@1949 247 % see also SMC12 - less detail here
b@1949 248
b@1949 249 Which type of files? % WAV, anything else? Perhaps not exhaustive list, but say something along the lines of 'whatever browser supports'
b@1947 250
b@1948 251 Streaming audio? % probably not, unless it's easy
b@1948 252
b@1949 253 Compatibility? % not IE, everything else fine?
b@1949 254
b@1949 255
b@1947 256
b@1947 257
b@1948 258 \section{Remote tests} % with previous?
b@1949 259
b@1949 260 If the experimenter is willing to trade some degree of control for a higher number of participants, the test can be hosted on a web server so that subjects can take part remotely. This way, a link can be shared widely in the hope of attracting a large amount of subjects, while listening conditions and subject reliability may be less ideal. However, a sound system calibration page and a wide range of metrics logged during the test mitigate these problems. Note also that in some experiments, it may be preferred that the subject has a `real life', familiar listening set-up, for instance when perceived quality differences on everyday sound systems are investigated.
b@1949 261 Furthermore, a fully browser-based test, where the collection of the results is automatic, is more efficient and technically reliable even when the test still takes place under lab conditions.
b@1949 262
b@1947 263 The following features allow easy and effective remote testing:
b@1950 264 \begin{itemize}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
b@1947 265 \item PHP script to collect result XML files
b@1947 266 \item Randomly pick specified number of audioholders
b@1949 267 \item Calibration
nickjillings@1953 268 % In theory calibration could be applied anywhere??
b@1947 269 \item Functionality to participate multiple times
b@1950 270 \begin{itemize}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
b@1947 271 \item Possible to log in with unique ID (no password)
nickjillings@1956 272 \item Pick `new user' (generates new, unique ID) or `already participated' (need already available ID)
b@1947 273 \item Store XML on server with IDs plus which audioholders have already been listened to
b@1947 274 \item Don't show `post-test' survey after first time
b@1947 275 \item Pick `new' audioholders if available
b@1947 276 \item Copy survey information first time to new XMLs
b@1947 277 \end{itemize}
b@1947 278 \item Intermediate saves
nickjillings@1956 279 \item Collect Public IP address information for geographic location (by country).
nickjillings@1953 280 \item Collect Browser and Display information
b@1947 281 \end{itemize}
b@1947 282
b@1481 283
b@1948 284 \section{Interfaces} % title? 'Front end'? % Dave
me@1952 285
me@1952 286 The purpose of this listening test framework is to allow any user the maximum flexibility to design a listening test for their exact application with minimum effort. To this end, a large range of standard listening test interfaces have been implemented. A review of existing listening test frameworks was undertaken and presented in~\Cref{tab:toolboxes}. HULTI-GEN~\cite{hultigen} is a single toolbox that presents the user with a large number of different test interfaces and allows for customisation of each test interface.
me@1952 287
b@1954 288 To provide users with a flexible system, a large range of `standard' listening test interfaces have been implemented, including: % pretty much the same wording as two sentences earlier
me@1952 289 \begin{itemize}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
me@1952 290 \item MUSHRA (ITU-R BS. 1534)~\cite{recommendation20031534}
me@1952 291 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 292 \item Multiple stimuli are presented and rated on a continuous scale, which includes a reference, hidden reference and hidden anchors.
me@1952 293 \end{itemize}
me@1952 294 \item Rank Scale~\cite{pascoe1983evaluation}
me@1952 295 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 296 \item Stimuli ranked on single horizontal scale, where they are ordered in preference order.
me@1952 297 \end{itemize}
me@1952 298 \item Likert scale~\cite{likert1932technique}
me@1952 299 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 300 \item Each stimuli has a five point scale with values: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree and Strongly Disagree.
me@1952 301 \end{itemize}
me@1952 302 \item ABC/HR (ITU-R BS. 1116)~\cite{recommendation19971116} (Mean Opinion Score: MOS)
me@1952 303 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 304 \item Each stimulus has a continuous scale (5-1), labeled as Imperceptible, Perceptible but not annoying, slightly annoying, annoying, very annoying.
me@1952 305 \end{itemize}
me@1952 306 \item -50 to 50 Bipolar with Ref
me@1952 307 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 308 \item Each stimulus has a continuous scale -50 to 50 with default values as 0 in middle and a comparison. There is also a provided reference \end{itemize}
me@1952 309 \item Absolute Category Rating (ACR) Scale~\cite{rec1996p}
me@1952 310 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 311 \item Each stimuli has a five point scale with values: Bad, Poor, Fair, Good, Excellent
me@1952 312 \end{itemize}
me@1952 313 \item Degredation Category Rating (DCR) Scale~\cite{rec1996p}
me@1952 314 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 315 \item Each stimuli has a five point scale with values: (5) Inaudible, (4) Audible but not annoying, (3) slightly annoying, (2) annoying, (1) very annoying.
me@1952 316 \end{itemize}
me@1952 317 \item Comparison Category Rating (CCR) Scale~\cite{rec1996p}
me@1952 318 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 319 \item Each stimuli has a seven point scale with values: Much Better, Better, Slightly Better, About the same, slightly worse, worse, much worse. There is also a provided reference.
me@1952 320 \end{itemize}
me@1952 321 \item 9 Point Hedonic Category Rating Scale~\cite{peryam1952advanced}
me@1952 322 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 323 \item Each stimuli has a seven point scale with values: Like Extremely, Like Very Much, Like Moderate, Like Slightly, Neither Like nor Dislike, dislike Extremely, dislike Very Much, dislike Moderate, dislike Slightly. There is also a provided reference.
me@1952 324 \end{itemize}
me@1952 325 \item ITU-R 5 Point Continuous Impairment Scale~\cite{rec1997bs}
me@1952 326 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 327 \item Each stimuli has a five point scale with values: (5) Imperceptible, (4) Perceptible but not annoying, (3) slightly annoying, (2) annoying, (1) very annoying. There is also a provided reference.
me@1952 328 \end{itemize}
me@1952 329 \item Pairwise Comparison (Better/Worse)~\cite{david1963method}
me@1952 330 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 331 \item A reference is provided and ever stimulus is rated as being either better or worse than the reference.
me@1952 332 \end{itemize}
me@1952 333 \item APE style \cite{ape}
me@1952 334 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 335 \item Multiple stimuli on a single horizontal slider for inter-sample rating.
me@1952 336 \end{itemize}
me@1952 337 \item Multi attribute ratings
me@1952 338 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 339 \item Multiple stimuli as points on a 2D plane for inter-sample rating (eg. Valence Arousal)
me@1952 340 \end{itemize}
me@1952 341 \item AB Test~\cite{lipshitz1981great}
me@1952 342 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 343 \item Two stimuli are presented at a time and the participant has to select a preferred stimulus.
me@1952 344 \end{itemize}
me@1952 345 \item ABX Test~\cite{clark1982high}
me@1952 346 \begin{itemize}
me@1952 347 \item Two stimuli are presented along with a reference and the participant has to select a preferred stimulus, often the closest to the reference.
me@1952 348 \end{itemize}
me@1952 349 \end{itemize}
me@1952 350
me@1952 351 While implementing all of these interfaces, it is possible to include any number of references, anchors, hidden references and hidden anchors into all of these listening test formats.
me@1952 352
nickjillings@1955 353 Because of the design choice to separate the core code and interface modules, it is possible for a 3rd party interface to be built with minimal effort. The repository includes documentation on which functions must be called and the specific functions they expect your interface to perform. To this end, there is an 'Interface' object which includes functions for creating the on-page comment boxes (including those with radio or checkbox responses), start and stop buttons with function handles pre-attached and the playhead / transport bars.
nickjillings@1955 354
me@1952 355 %%%% \begin{itemize}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
me@1952 356 %%%% \item (APE style) \cite{ape}
me@1952 357 %%%% \item Multi attribute ratings
me@1952 358 %%%% \item MUSHRA (ITU-R BS. 1534)~\cite{recommendation20031534}
me@1952 359 %%%% \item Interval Scale~\cite{zacharov1999round}
me@1952 360 %%%% \item Rank Scale~\cite{pascoe1983evaluation}
me@1952 361 %%%%
me@1952 362 %%%% \item 2D Plane rating - e.g. Valence vs. Arousal~\cite{carroll1969individual}
me@1952 363 %%%% \item Likert scale~\cite{likert1932technique}
me@1952 364 %%%%
me@1952 365 %%%% \item {\bf All the following are the interfaces available in HULTI-GEN~\cite{hultigen} }
me@1952 366 %%%% \item ABC/HR (ITU-R BS. 1116)~\cite{recommendation19971116}
me@1952 367 %%%% \begin{itemize}
me@1952 368 %%%% \item Continuous Scale (5-1) Imperceptible, Perceptible but not annoying, slightly annoying, annoying, very annoying. (default Inaudible?)
me@1952 369 %%%% \end{itemize}
me@1952 370 %%%% \item -50 to 50 Bipolar with Ref
me@1952 371 %%%% \begin{itemize}
me@1952 372 %%%% \item Scale -50 to 50 on Mushra with default values as 0 in middle and a comparison ``Reference'' to compare to 0 value
me@1952 373 %%%% \end{itemize}
me@1952 374 %%%% \item Absolute Category Rating (ACR) Scale~\cite{rec1996p}
me@1952 375 %%%% \begin{itemize}
me@1952 376 %%%% \item 5 point Scale - Bad, Poor, Fair, Good, Excellent (Default fair?)
me@1952 377 %%%% \end{itemize}
me@1952 378 %%%% \item Degredation Category Rating (DCR) Scale~\cite{rec1996p}
me@1952 379 %%%% \begin{itemize}
me@1952 380 %%%% \item 5 point Scale - Inaudible, Audible but not annoying, slightly annoying, annoying, very annoying. (default Inaudible?) - {\it Basically just quantised ABC/HR?}
me@1952 381 %%%% \end{itemize}
me@1952 382 %%%% \item Comparison Category Rating (CCR) Scale~\cite{rec1996p}
me@1952 383 %%%% \begin{itemize}
me@1952 384 %%%% \item 7 point scale: Much Better, Better, Slightly Better, About the same, slightly worse, worse, much worse - Default about the same with reference to compare to
me@1952 385 %%%% \end{itemize}
me@1952 386 %%%% \item 9 Point Hedonic Category Rating Scale~\cite{peryam1952advanced}
me@1952 387 %%%% \begin{itemize}
me@1952 388 %%%% \item 9 point scale: Like Extremely, Like Very Much, Like Moderate, Like Slightly, Neither Like nor Dislike, dislike Extremely, dislike Very Much, dislike Moderate, dislike Slightly - Default Neither Like nor Dislike with reference to compare to
me@1952 389 %%%% \end{itemize}
me@1952 390 %%%% \item ITU-R 5 Point Continuous Impairment Scale~\cite{rec1997bs}
me@1952 391 %%%% \begin{itemize}
me@1952 392 %%%% \item 5 point Scale (5-1) Imperceptible, Perceptible but not annoying, slightly annoying, annoying, very annoying. (default Inaudible?)- {\it Basically just quantised ABC/HR, or Different named DCR}
me@1952 393 %%%% \end{itemize}
me@1952 394 %%%% \item Pairwise Comparison (Better/Worse)~\cite{david1963method}
me@1952 395 %%%% \begin{itemize}
me@1952 396 %%%% \item 2 point Scale - Better or Worse - (not sure how to default this - they default everything to better, which is an interesting choice)
me@1952 397 %%%% \end{itemize}
me@1952 398 %%%% \end{itemize}
me@1952 399
nickjillings@1955 400 % Build your own test
nickjillings@1957 401 \begin{comment}
me@1952 402 { \bf A screenshot would be nice.
me@1952 403
me@1952 404 Established tests (see below) included as `presets' in the build-your-own-test page. }
nickjillings@1957 405 \end{comment}
b@1481 406
b@1481 407 \section{Analysis and diagnostics}
b@1949 408 % don't mention Python scripts
b@1481 409 It would be great to have easy-to-use analysis tools to visualise the collected data and even do science with it. Even better would be to have all this in the browser. Complete perfection would be achieved if and when only limited setup, installation time, and expertise are required for the average non-CS researcher to use this.
b@1481 410
b@1945 411 The following could be nice:
b@1945 412
b@1950 413 \begin{itemize}[noitemsep,nolistsep]
b@1945 414 \item Web page showing all audioholder IDs, file names, subject IDs, audio element IDs, ... in the collected XMLs so far (\texttt{saves/*.xml})
b@1945 415 \item Check/uncheck each of the above for analysis (e.g. zoom in on a certain song, or exclude a subset of subjects)
b@1945 416 \item Click a mix to hear it (follow path in XML setup file, which is also embedded in the XML result file)
b@1945 417 \item Box plot, confidence plot, scatter plot of values (for a given audioholder)
b@1945 418 \item Timeline for a specific subject (see Python scripts), perhaps re-playing the experiment in X times realtime. (If actual realtime, you could replay the audio...)
b@1945 419 \item Distribution plots of any radio button and number questions (drop-down menu with `pretest', `posttest', ...; then drop-down menu with question `IDs' like `gender', `age', ...; make pie chart/histogram of these values over selected range of XMLs)
b@1945 420 \item All `comments' on a specific audioelement
b@1945 421 \item A `download' button for a nice CSV of various things (values, survey responses, comments) people might want to use for analysis, e.g. when XML scares them
b@1947 422 \item Validation of setup XMLs (easily spot `errors', like duplicate IDs or URLs, missing/dangling tags, ...)
b@1945 423 \end{itemize}
b@1945 424
b@1945 425 A subset of the above would already be nice for this paper.
b@1945 426
b@1481 427 Some pictures here please.
b@1481 428
b@1948 429 \section{Concluding remarks and future work}
b@1481 430
b@1949 431 The code and documentation can be pulled or downloaded from \url{code.soundsoftware.ac.uk/projects/webaudioevaluationtool}.
b@1481 432
b@1949 433 [Talking a little bit about what else might happen. Unless we really want to wrap this up. ]
nickjillings@1957 434
nickjillings@1957 435 \cite{schoeffler2015mushra} gives a 'checklist' for subjective evaluation of audio systems. The Web Audio Evaluation Toolbox meets most of its given requirements including remote testing, crossfading between audio streams, collecting browser information, utilising UI elements and working with various audio formats including uncompressed PCM or WAV format.
b@1949 436 % remote
b@1949 437 % language support (not explicitly stated)
b@1949 438 % crossfades
nickjillings@1956 439 % choosing speakers/sound device from within browser? --- NOT POSSIBLE, can only determine channel output counts and its up to the hardware to determine
b@1949 440 % collect information about software and sound system
b@1949 441 % buttons, scales, ... UI elements
b@1949 442 % must be able to load uncompressed PCM
b@1949 443
b@1949 444 [What can we not do? `Method of adjustment', as in \cite{schoeffler2015mushra} is another can of worms, because, like, you could adjust lots of things (volume is just one of them, that could be done quite easily). Same for using input signals like the participant's voice. Either leave out, or mention this requires modification of the code we provide.]
b@1481 445
b@1481 446 %
b@1481 447 % The following two commands are all you need in the
b@1481 448 % initial runs of your .tex file to
b@1481 449 % produce the bibliography for the citations in your paper.
b@1481 450 \bibliographystyle{abbrv}
b@1481 451 \bibliography{WAC2016} % sigproc.bib is the name of the Bibliography in this case
b@1481 452 % You must have a proper ".bib" file
b@1481 453 % and remember to run:
b@1481 454 % latex bibtex latex latex
b@1481 455 % to resolve all references
b@1481 456 %
b@1481 457 % ACM needs 'a single self-contained file'!
b@1481 458 %
b@1481 459 \end{document}