skip to main content

This content will become publicly available on February 1, 2023

Title: Edge-assisted Collaborative Image Recognition for Mobile Augmented Reality
Mobile Augmented Reality (AR), which overlays digital content on the real-world scenes surrounding a user, is bringing immersive interactive experiences where the real and virtual worlds are tightly coupled. To enable seamless and precise AR experiences, an image recognition system that can accurately recognize the object in the camera view with low system latency is required. However, due to the pervasiveness and severity of image distortions, an effective and robust image recognition solution for “in the wild” mobile AR is still elusive. In this article, we present CollabAR, an edge-assisted system that provides distortion-tolerant image recognition for mobile AR with imperceptible system latency. CollabAR incorporates both distortion-tolerant and collaborative image recognition modules in its design. The former enables distortion-adaptive image recognition to improve the robustness against image distortions, while the latter exploits the spatial-temporal correlation among mobile AR users to improve recognition accuracy. Moreover, as it is difficult to collect a large-scale image distortion dataset, we propose a Cycle-Consistent Generative Adversarial Network-based data augmentation method to synthesize realistic image distortion. Our evaluation demonstrates that CollabAR achieves over 85% recognition accuracy for “in the wild” images with severe distortions, while reducing the end-to-end system latency to as low as 18.2 ms.
Authors:
; ; ; ; ; ;
Award ID(s):
2046072 1908051 1903136
Publication Date:
NSF-PAR ID:
10315355
Journal Name:
ACM transactions on sensor networks
Volume:
18
Issue:
1
ISSN:
1550-4859
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Mobile Augmented Reality (AR), which overlays digital content on the real-world scenes surrounding a user, is bringing immersive interactive experiences where the real and virtual worlds are tightly coupled. To enable seamless and precise AR experiences, an image recognition system that can accurately recognize the object in the camera view with low system latency is required. However, due to the pervasiveness and severity of image distortions, an effective and robust image recognition solution for mobile AR is still elusive. In this paper, we present CollabAR, an edge-assisted system that provides distortion-tolerant image recognition for mobile AR with imperceptible system latency.more »CollabAR incorporates both distortion-tolerant and collaborative image recognition modules in its design. The former enables distortion-adaptive image recognition to improve the robustness against image distortions, while the latter exploits the `spatial-temporal' correlation among mobile AR users to improve recognition accuracy. We implement CollabAR on four different commodity devices, and evaluate its performance on two multi-view image datasets. Our evaluation demonstrates that CollabAR achieves over 96% recognition accuracy for images with severe distortions, while reducing the end-to-end system latency to as low as 17.8ms for commodity mobile devices.« less
  2. Mobile Augmented Reality (AR), which overlays digital information with real-world scenes surrounding a user, provides an enhanced mode of interaction with the ambient world. Contextual AR applications rely on image recognition to identify objects in the view of the mobile device. In practice, due to image distortions and device resource constraints, achieving high performance image recognition for AR is challenging. Recent advances in edge computing offer opportunities for designing collaborative image recognition frameworks for AR. In this demonstration, we present CollabAR, an edge-assisted collaborative image recognition framework. CollabAR allows AR devices that are facing the same scene to collaborate onmore »the recognition task. Demo participants develop an intuition for different image distortions and their impact on image recognition accuracy. We showcase how heterogeneous images taken by different users can be aggregated to improve recognition accuracy and provide a better user experience in AR.« less
  3. Mobile Augmented Reality (AR) provides immersive experiences by aligning virtual content (holograms) with a view of the real world. When a user places a hologram it is usually expected that like a real object, it remains in the same place. However, positional errors frequently occur due to inaccurate environment mapping and device localization, to a large extent determined by the properties of natural visual features in the scene. In this demonstration we present SceneIt, the first visual environment rating system for mobile AR based on predictions of hologram positional error magnitude. SceneIt allows users to determine if virtual content placedmore »in their environment will drift noticeably out of position, without requiring them to place that content. It shows that the severity of positional error for a given visual environment is predictable, and that this prediction can be calculated with sufficiently high accuracy and low latency to be useful in mobile AR applications.« less
  4. Augmented reality is an emerging application on mobile devices. However, there is a lack of understanding of the communication requirements and challenges of multi-user AR scenarios. In this position paper, we propose several important research issues that need to be addressed for low-latency, accurate shared AR experiences: (a) Systems tradeoffs of AR communication architectures used today in mobile AR platforms; (b) Understanding AR communication patterns and adapting the AR application layer to dynamically changing network conditions; and (c) Tools and methodologies to evaluate AR quality of experience in real time on mobile devices. We present preliminary measurements of off-the-shelf mobilemore »AR platforms as well as results from our AR system, ShareAR, illustrating performance tradeoffs and indicating promising new research directions.« less
  5. Obeid, I. (Ed.)
    The Neural Engineering Data Consortium (NEDC) is developing the Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus (TUDP), an open source database of high-resolution images from scanned pathology samples [1], as part of its National Science Foundation-funded Major Research Instrumentation grant titled “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning” [2]. The long-term goal of this project is to release one million images. We have currently scanned over 100,000 images and are in the process of annotating breast tissue data for our first official corpus release, v1.0.0. This release contains 3,505 annotated images of breast tissue including 74 patients withmore »cancerous diagnoses (out of a total of 296 patients). In this poster, we will present an analysis of this corpus and discuss the challenges we have faced in efficiently producing high quality annotations of breast tissue. It is well known that state of the art algorithms in machine learning require vast amounts of data. Fields such as speech recognition [3], image recognition [4] and text processing [5] are able to deliver impressive performance with complex deep learning models because they have developed large corpora to support training of extremely high-dimensional models (e.g., billions of parameters). Other fields that do not have access to such data resources must rely on techniques in which existing models can be adapted to new datasets [6]. A preliminary version of this breast corpus release was tested in a pilot study using a baseline machine learning system, ResNet18 [7], that leverages several open-source Python tools. The pilot corpus was divided into three sets: train, development, and evaluation. Portions of these slides were manually annotated [1] using the nine labels in Table 1 [8] to identify five to ten examples of pathological features on each slide. Not every pathological feature is annotated, meaning excluded areas can include focuses particular to these labels that are not used for training. A summary of the number of patches within each label is given in Table 2. To maintain a balanced training set, 1,000 patches of each label were used to train the machine learning model. Throughout all sets, only annotated patches were involved in model development. The performance of this model in identifying all the patches in the evaluation set can be seen in the confusion matrix of classification accuracy in Table 3. The highest performing labels were background, 97% correct identification, and artifact, 76% correct identification. A correlation exists between labels with more than 6,000 development patches and accurate performance on the evaluation set. Additionally, these results indicated a need to further refine the annotation of invasive ductal carcinoma (“indc”), inflammation (“infl”), nonneoplastic features (“nneo”), normal (“norm”) and suspicious (“susp”). This pilot experiment motivated changes to the corpus that will be discussed in detail in this poster presentation. To increase the accuracy of the machine learning model, we modified how we addressed underperforming labels. One common source of error arose with how non-background labels were converted into patches. Large areas of background within other labels were isolated within a patch resulting in connective tissue misrepresenting a non-background label. In response, the annotation overlay margins were revised to exclude benign connective tissue in non-background labels. Corresponding patient reports and supporting immunohistochemical stains further guided annotation reviews. The microscopic diagnoses given by the primary pathologist in these reports detail the pathological findings within each tissue site, but not within each specific slide. The microscopic diagnoses informed revisions specifically targeting annotated regions classified as cancerous, ensuring that the labels “indc” and “dcis” were used only in situations where a micropathologist diagnosed it as such. Further differentiation of cancerous and precancerous labels, as well as the location of their focus on a slide, could be accomplished with supplemental immunohistochemically (IHC) stained slides. When distinguishing whether a focus is a nonneoplastic feature versus a cancerous growth, pathologists employ antigen targeting stains to the tissue in question to confirm the diagnosis. For example, a nonneoplastic feature of usual ductal hyperplasia will display diffuse staining for cytokeratin 5 (CK5) and no diffuse staining for estrogen receptor (ER), while a cancerous growth of ductal carcinoma in situ will have negative or focally positive staining for CK5 and diffuse staining for ER [9]. Many tissue samples contain cancerous and non-cancerous features with morphological overlaps that cause variability between annotators. The informative fields IHC slides provide could play an integral role in machine model pathology diagnostics. Following the revisions made on all the annotations, a second experiment was run using ResNet18. Compared to the pilot study, an increase of model prediction accuracy was seen for the labels indc, infl, nneo, norm, and null. This increase is correlated with an increase in annotated area and annotation accuracy. Model performance in identifying the suspicious label decreased by 25% due to the decrease of 57% in the total annotated area described by this label. A summary of the model performance is given in Table 4, which shows the new prediction accuracy and the absolute change in error rate compared to Table 3. The breast tissue subset we are developing includes 3,505 annotated breast pathology slides from 296 patients. The average size of a scanned SVS file is 363 MB. The annotations are stored in an XML format. A CSV version of the annotation file is also available which provides a flat, or simple, annotation that is easy for machine learning researchers to access and interface to their systems. Each patient is identified by an anonymized medical reference number. Within each patient’s directory, one or more sessions are identified, also anonymized to the first of the month in which the sample was taken. These sessions are broken into groupings of tissue taken on that date (in this case, breast tissue). A deidentified patient report stored as a flat text file is also available. Within these slides there are a total of 16,971 total annotated regions with an average of 4.84 annotations per slide. Among those annotations, 8,035 are non-cancerous (normal, background, null, and artifact,) 6,222 are carcinogenic signs (inflammation, nonneoplastic and suspicious,) and 2,714 are cancerous labels (ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive ductal carcinoma in situ.) The individual patients are split up into three sets: train, development, and evaluation. Of the 74 cancerous patients, 20 were allotted for both the development and evaluation sets, while the remain 34 were allotted for train. The remaining 222 patients were split up to preserve the overall distribution of labels within the corpus. This was done in hope of creating control sets for comparable studies. Overall, the development and evaluation sets each have 80 patients, while the training set has 136 patients. In a related component of this project, slides from the Fox Chase Cancer Center (FCCC) Biosample Repository (https://www.foxchase.org/research/facilities/genetic-research-facilities/biosample-repository -facility) are being digitized in addition to slides provided by Temple University Hospital. This data includes 18 different types of tissue including approximately 38.5% urinary tissue and 16.5% gynecological tissue. These slides and the metadata provided with them are already anonymized and include diagnoses in a spreadsheet with sample and patient ID. We plan to release over 13,000 unannotated slides from the FCCC Corpus simultaneously with v1.0.0 of TUDP. Details of this release will also be discussed in this poster. Few digitally annotated databases of pathology samples like TUDP exist due to the extensive data collection and processing required. The breast corpus subset should be released by November 2021. By December 2021 we should also release the unannotated FCCC data. We are currently annotating urinary tract data as well. We expect to release about 5,600 processed TUH slides in this subset. We have an additional 53,000 unprocessed TUH slides digitized. Corpora of this size will stimulate the development of a new generation of deep learning technology. In clinical settings where resources are limited, an assistive diagnoses model could support pathologists’ workload and even help prioritize suspected cancerous cases. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This material is supported by the National Science Foundation under grants nos. CNS-1726188 and 1925494. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. REFERENCES [1] N. Shawki et al., “The Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus,” in Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology: Emerging Trends in Research and Applications, 1st ed., I. Obeid, I. Selesnick, and J. Picone, Eds. New York City, New York, USA: Springer, 2020, pp. 67 104. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783030368432. [2] J. Picone, T. Farkas, I. Obeid, and Y. Persidsky, “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning.” Major Research Instrumentation (MRI), Division of Computer and Network Systems, Award No. 1726188, January 1, 2018 – December 31, 2021. https://www. isip.piconepress.com/projects/nsf_dpath/. [3] A. Gulati et al., “Conformer: Convolution-augmented Transformer for Speech Recognition,” in Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association (INTERSPEECH), 2020, pp. 5036-5040. https://doi.org/10.21437/interspeech.2020-3015. [4] C.-J. Wu et al., “Machine Learning at Facebook: Understanding Inference at the Edge,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA), 2019, pp. 331–344. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8675201. [5] I. Caswell and B. Liang, “Recent Advances in Google Translate,” Google AI Blog: The latest from Google Research, 2020. [Online]. Available: https://ai.googleblog.com/2020/06/recent-advances-in-google-translate.html. [Accessed: 01-Aug-2021]. [6] V. Khalkhali, N. Shawki, V. Shah, M. Golmohammadi, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Low Latency Real-Time Seizure Detection Using Transfer Deep Learning,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), 2021, pp. 1 7. https://www.isip. piconepress.com/publications/conference_proceedings/2021/ieee_spmb/eeg_transfer_learning/. [7] J. Picone, T. Farkas, I. Obeid, and Y. Persidsky, “MRI: High Performance Digital Pathology Using Big Data and Machine Learning,” Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, 2020. https://www.isip.piconepress.com/publications/reports/2020/nsf/mri_dpath/. [8] I. Hunt, S. Husain, J. Simons, I. Obeid, and J. Picone, “Recent Advances in the Temple University Digital Pathology Corpus,” in Proceedings of the IEEE Signal Processing in Medicine and Biology Symposium (SPMB), 2019, pp. 1–4. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9037859. [9] A. P. Martinez, C. Cohen, K. Z. Hanley, and X. (Bill) Li, “Estrogen Receptor and Cytokeratin 5 Are Reliable Markers to Separate Usual Ductal Hyperplasia From Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Low-Grade Ductal Carcinoma In Situ,” Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med., vol. 140, no. 7, pp. 686–689, Apr. 2016. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2015-0238-OA.« less