Access 2017 Conference Day 1 Notes Sessions 8-10 #accessYXE
Session 8: The SIMSSA Project: Search as Access to Digital Music Libraries - Emily Hopkins
Notated music - images of scores, and making them machine readable and searchable. Single Interface for Music Score Searching and Analysis. SSHRC Partnership grant 2014-2021, many international partners.
How it works:
Library Digitizes score
Optical Music Recognition
Music encoding initiative
Music search and analysis
1. How do we access scores? Each library has own scores
IIIF Musiclibs.net gather in one place - over 67,000 documents with more on the way. But just Pictures.
2. How teach computers to read musical scores? XML analog for music is optical music recognition making it machine readable (mp4, or MEI based on TEI that ends itself well to library collections). Commercial options: Sebelius' photoscore designed for standard music scores (not handwritten). Many researchers study chant (Salzinnes Antiphonal) and other less popular forms of writing. A page or two from document to process identifying ground truths to prep for machine learning. Pixel.js allows for correction of machine reading ground truths. Pixelwise Classification - computer determines probability of pixel belonging to a particular category. Does not depend on domain specific heuristics, but document specific ground truths. Interactive classifier trains OMR, Neon.js overlays end result over original image, and then you can create EMI file faithful to original manuscript. Undergoing usability at McGill and Dalhousie.
Crowdsourced OMR correction: Rodan to organize workflow, collaboration with partner organizations and user communities. Now we have a format computer can read. how will search and analysis work?
3. Existing search allows for metadata search. OMR allows search of melodic search and variations and search of degrees of variation from original melody. Instead of laboriously studying melodic lines by hand, can use large scale searching. See: Schubert and Cumming 2015 article in Early Music 43.4 pp. 577-86. Studying patterns can reveal styles of different eras and composers. See also: Desmond, Hopkins, and Howes' 2016 SIMSSA VIII presentation on treatment of different kinds of chords and how changed over time period.
Complete change in scope of research questions that can now be asked. (This is amazing.)
Session 9: Supporting Media-intensive Digital Scholarship: The Development of a Streaming Media Repository at the University of Alberta Libraries - Sean Luyk, Umar Qasim, & Weiwei Shi
ERA A+V media hosting adn streaming service based on Avalon Media System an open source media repository project (Fedora). IR, DataVerse. Many not true streaming but progressive download. Kaltura, Ensemble, ShareStream - focus on short term access for teaching and learning, limited metadata and no control over deposit. More like an individual account like a YouTube channel, cant control copyright process.
Project kickoff Oct 2015 to launch Avalon adn AV service. Soft launch for library staff in May 2016, public beta 9/2016-6/2017, official release 7/17. Upgrade to Avalon 6 would put with Fedora 4, this will expand to self-deposit.
Model: deposit is mediated for now (Digital Media Deposit Request Form open to faculty and grad students) due to size of files and concerns about copyright and right investigation. Deposits done by librarians in batch situation usually. service described on own page, single point of contact is the IR helpdesk.
Technical Overview
Repository is adapted based on Avalon Media System, developed as a Samvera head. How application is structured - Samvera Head based on Rails App. Use small component for transcoding multimedia content, upon ingest creates three version of derivatives for different streaming needs. Then use Wowza. (Need a better look at the Architecture Details slide, too tiny.) Core features of Avalon Media Syste - Deposit, workflow management, search, discover, single sign on (CCID), LTI integration with LMS< complicated access control at item and collection level, embed content to websites, create playlist, display closed captioning, standards based metadata (MODS), persistent URL.
Customization: streamlined batch ingest even more--UI initiated trigger to start ingest process. Customization to metadata/deposit form, additional validation on media objects (language and genre), branding consistent with IR, minor modification to clarify permission and access control, follow development practice test-driven practice where integrate continuous integration tools to review workflow. Challenge to enforce practices because dealing with different level of quality and styles inherited. Robust testing. Added rollbar log monitoring.
See era-av.library.ualberta.ca - driven by Blacklight search interface
Currently at 170ish publicly published objects, main use is online education. Some research data management case studies. Course was sharing via google drive, students using their non UoA accounts, kept requesting access; another course in LIS provide streaming access to some content. Challenge - originally were to stream DVDs that were screen-captured, but were warned by legal because of TPMs on DVDs. Challenges with LTI integration, required a lot of development to integrate with Moodle instance. Research data management is really right now just collections making available for research - recordings of UofA concerts, fieldwork of collected Sufi music recording. Long term potential for integration with other repositories.
Media intensive scholarship - investigating as hub for media-oriented DH projects. Not really manipulating or reading media files. OJS journals, Licensed resources.
Q: You're also running a sofia head. Do you think there will be good media handling, or will you continue running two separate heads? A: Goal is eventually one experience. [Ah really works as separate repository.] They are stepping away from Samvera as IR for main repository to explore other options.
Session 10: The Academic Library Commons: Re-imaging Collaborative Learning Spaces to Support the Scholarly Journey from Curiosity to Discovery to Publication - Michael Courtney and Angela Courtney
198 year old library system has evolved to take into consideration evolution of technology in library's role on a university's campus. Indiana University (Bloomington) Libraries 12th largest in North America, 20+ libraries across campus, >9 mill print volumes, 900+ languages. Over 180 years, intense focus on building research collection. Focus has changed. Physical library has only been in few locations--building as monument to the collection, a brutalist box. Once crossed into 21st century, change. Change accelerated in last 17 years. University President very IT driven, made it a mission of Presidency to not just increase and improve but magnify technology infrastructure of campus.
In 2002: first dramatic physical change in main library occurred. went from physical collection for gen ed undergrad curriculum was rebadged as an info commons, print location pushed up or relocated, or pulled out for offsite storage. This broadened the space, room for a lot of technology (workstations, some internal IT support), then that stayed stagnant as an IC for about a decade. After that, again re-envisioned. In one way, infused with more tech, in another, a lot of tech was removed. In 2010, real observation of ways students used spaces - not using a lot of the workstations (hundreds) so 75% removed. Instead, Univ IT became a 50% partner in this space, 24/7 space staffed by UniIT consultants and includes a rich service hub--tech support and support across student research life cycle. research consultants, librarians, library assistants, peer assistant program, student life issue peer consultants, writing tutorial services physical unit in that space. Technology-driven partnerships.
More commons-ing: The Grad Commons--less of a focus on tech and more on space exclusively for grad students to study and do research. Partnership w/grad student and professional organization because wanted and needed dedicated space. Survey, assessment, reflection, pause, repeat. Grad students wanted certain aspects of tech, emphasis on outlets, printer, but great or quiet, dedicated, grad student only space. IU Scholars' Commons. IQ wall - hi-def visualization wall.
Programming partnerships with office hours in library.
/Fin
Notated music - images of scores, and making them machine readable and searchable. Single Interface for Music Score Searching and Analysis. SSHRC Partnership grant 2014-2021, many international partners.
How it works:
Library Digitizes score
Optical Music Recognition
Music encoding initiative
Music search and analysis
1. How do we access scores? Each library has own scores
IIIF Musiclibs.net gather in one place - over 67,000 documents with more on the way. But just Pictures.
2. How teach computers to read musical scores? XML analog for music is optical music recognition making it machine readable (mp4, or MEI based on TEI that ends itself well to library collections). Commercial options: Sebelius' photoscore designed for standard music scores (not handwritten). Many researchers study chant (Salzinnes Antiphonal) and other less popular forms of writing. A page or two from document to process identifying ground truths to prep for machine learning. Pixel.js allows for correction of machine reading ground truths. Pixelwise Classification - computer determines probability of pixel belonging to a particular category. Does not depend on domain specific heuristics, but document specific ground truths. Interactive classifier trains OMR, Neon.js overlays end result over original image, and then you can create EMI file faithful to original manuscript. Undergoing usability at McGill and Dalhousie.
Crowdsourced OMR correction: Rodan to organize workflow, collaboration with partner organizations and user communities. Now we have a format computer can read. how will search and analysis work?
3. Existing search allows for metadata search. OMR allows search of melodic search and variations and search of degrees of variation from original melody. Instead of laboriously studying melodic lines by hand, can use large scale searching. See: Schubert and Cumming 2015 article in Early Music 43.4 pp. 577-86. Studying patterns can reveal styles of different eras and composers. See also: Desmond, Hopkins, and Howes' 2016 SIMSSA VIII presentation on treatment of different kinds of chords and how changed over time period.
Complete change in scope of research questions that can now be asked. (This is amazing.)
Session 9: Supporting Media-intensive Digital Scholarship: The Development of a Streaming Media Repository at the University of Alberta Libraries - Sean Luyk, Umar Qasim, & Weiwei Shi
ERA A+V media hosting adn streaming service based on Avalon Media System an open source media repository project (Fedora). IR, DataVerse. Many not true streaming but progressive download. Kaltura, Ensemble, ShareStream - focus on short term access for teaching and learning, limited metadata and no control over deposit. More like an individual account like a YouTube channel, cant control copyright process.
Project kickoff Oct 2015 to launch Avalon adn AV service. Soft launch for library staff in May 2016, public beta 9/2016-6/2017, official release 7/17. Upgrade to Avalon 6 would put with Fedora 4, this will expand to self-deposit.
Model: deposit is mediated for now (Digital Media Deposit Request Form open to faculty and grad students) due to size of files and concerns about copyright and right investigation. Deposits done by librarians in batch situation usually. service described on own page, single point of contact is the IR helpdesk.
Technical Overview
Repository is adapted based on Avalon Media System, developed as a Samvera head. How application is structured - Samvera Head based on Rails App. Use small component for transcoding multimedia content, upon ingest creates three version of derivatives for different streaming needs. Then use Wowza. (Need a better look at the Architecture Details slide, too tiny.) Core features of Avalon Media Syste - Deposit, workflow management, search, discover, single sign on (CCID), LTI integration with LMS< complicated access control at item and collection level, embed content to websites, create playlist, display closed captioning, standards based metadata (MODS), persistent URL.
Customization: streamlined batch ingest even more--UI initiated trigger to start ingest process. Customization to metadata/deposit form, additional validation on media objects (language and genre), branding consistent with IR, minor modification to clarify permission and access control, follow development practice test-driven practice where integrate continuous integration tools to review workflow. Challenge to enforce practices because dealing with different level of quality and styles inherited. Robust testing. Added rollbar log monitoring.
See era-av.library.ualberta.ca - driven by Blacklight search interface
Currently at 170ish publicly published objects, main use is online education. Some research data management case studies. Course was sharing via google drive, students using their non UoA accounts, kept requesting access; another course in LIS provide streaming access to some content. Challenge - originally were to stream DVDs that were screen-captured, but were warned by legal because of TPMs on DVDs. Challenges with LTI integration, required a lot of development to integrate with Moodle instance. Research data management is really right now just collections making available for research - recordings of UofA concerts, fieldwork of collected Sufi music recording. Long term potential for integration with other repositories.
Media intensive scholarship - investigating as hub for media-oriented DH projects. Not really manipulating or reading media files. OJS journals, Licensed resources.
Q: You're also running a sofia head. Do you think there will be good media handling, or will you continue running two separate heads? A: Goal is eventually one experience. [Ah really works as separate repository.] They are stepping away from Samvera as IR for main repository to explore other options.
Session 10: The Academic Library Commons: Re-imaging Collaborative Learning Spaces to Support the Scholarly Journey from Curiosity to Discovery to Publication - Michael Courtney and Angela Courtney
198 year old library system has evolved to take into consideration evolution of technology in library's role on a university's campus. Indiana University (Bloomington) Libraries 12th largest in North America, 20+ libraries across campus, >9 mill print volumes, 900+ languages. Over 180 years, intense focus on building research collection. Focus has changed. Physical library has only been in few locations--building as monument to the collection, a brutalist box. Once crossed into 21st century, change. Change accelerated in last 17 years. University President very IT driven, made it a mission of Presidency to not just increase and improve but magnify technology infrastructure of campus.
In 2002: first dramatic physical change in main library occurred. went from physical collection for gen ed undergrad curriculum was rebadged as an info commons, print location pushed up or relocated, or pulled out for offsite storage. This broadened the space, room for a lot of technology (workstations, some internal IT support), then that stayed stagnant as an IC for about a decade. After that, again re-envisioned. In one way, infused with more tech, in another, a lot of tech was removed. In 2010, real observation of ways students used spaces - not using a lot of the workstations (hundreds) so 75% removed. Instead, Univ IT became a 50% partner in this space, 24/7 space staffed by UniIT consultants and includes a rich service hub--tech support and support across student research life cycle. research consultants, librarians, library assistants, peer assistant program, student life issue peer consultants, writing tutorial services physical unit in that space. Technology-driven partnerships.
More commons-ing: The Grad Commons--less of a focus on tech and more on space exclusively for grad students to study and do research. Partnership w/grad student and professional organization because wanted and needed dedicated space. Survey, assessment, reflection, pause, repeat. Grad students wanted certain aspects of tech, emphasis on outlets, printer, but great or quiet, dedicated, grad student only space. IU Scholars' Commons. IQ wall - hi-def visualization wall.
Programming partnerships with office hours in library.
/Fin
Comments