Components of Common Educational Teleoperation Platform for Robotics: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Jason Zhu and Version 1 by Tero Kaarlela.

The erratic modern world introduces challenges to all sectors of societies and potentially introduces additional inequality. One possibility to decrease the educational inequality is to provide remote access to facilities that enable learning and training. A similar approach of remote resource usage can be utilized in resource-poor situations where the required equipment is available at other premises. The concept of Industry 5.0 (i5.0) focuses on a human-centric approach, enabling technologies to concentrate on human–machine interaction and emphasizing the importance of societal values. The novel robotics teleoperation platform supported by the i5.0 reduces inequality and allows usage and learning of robotics remotely independently of time and location. The platform is based on digital twins with bi-directional data transmission between the physical and digital counterparts. 

  • digital twin
  • teleoperation
  • robotics

1. Introduction

Current challenges brought by ongoing conflicts, worldwide threats, and unequal economical conditions [1,2][1][2] are introducing major challenges to all sectors of societies. As a concrete example, pandemic restrictions have set limitations for student group sessions at university laboratories, forcing educational institutes to rethink practical arrangements of laboratory exercises [3,4,5][3][4][5]. Climate change requires an increased appreciation of environmental awareness and preferring green choices [1]. An example of a greener choice is the reduction of traveling to only situations truly necessary and favoring alternative approaches whenever possible. In addition to reduced traveling, changes in consumption habits are required; purchasing of new products should not be preferred, instead leasing or renting of existing equipment should be. Efficient utilization of existing equipment located in remote locations preserves the resources required for manufacturing new units. Equality can be promoted by offering people in developing countries the possibility of training remotely utilizing modern equipment [6,7][6][7]. As Bryndin [8] notes, the aim of Society 5.0 is to create equal possibilities for all individuals and to create an environment for realizing equal possibilities. A possibility to participate from distant locations would provide a solution to overcome pandemic restrictions, enable exercising without traveling, and increase the utilization rate of existing equipment, supporting a human-centric approach of utilizing i5.0 technologies. In this paper, a common teleoperation platform for robotics utilizing digital twins(DT) is presented as a solution for the distant utilization of robotics.
Moniruzzaman et al. [9] defined robotic teleoperation as a robot that is controlled or managed by a human operator over a data connection. Bi-directional communication between the robot and human operator allows the human operator to provide orders and suggestions to the tasks while the robot executes the tasks based on the input from the human operator. In the scope of this proposal, bi-directional communication enables a user to control robots at the university laboratory from any location, therefore saving time and environmental resources consumed on traveling. Teleoperation platform services are also available for students abroad and studying at other universities. There are previous studies on using teleoperations in universities. Marin et al. [10] proposed a telerobotic system, allowing students and scientists to control robots remotely. In addition to this work, the solution presented here provides time resource management to enable the scheduling of teleoperated equipment and Cybersecurity considerations. A trivial calendar application is provided as a front-end for time resource management, allowing students to reserve time resources for a specific robot to exercise robotic skills. In this proposal, the scope of resource management is limited to students reserving time slots to study robotics. The scope can be broadened to include equipment sharing and rental between companies and educational institutes.
Sharing time resources of available equipment requires user authentication and authorization to create a link between time resources, equipment, and user. The platform presented includes methods for user registration, authentication, and authorization. Daily tasks for user registration, strong password creation, and password recovery have been automated to save administrator time.
Social communication is an important feature for students participating in education from distant locations [11,12][11][12]. Communication is needed by students to request help for the usage of the platform and to exchange experiences with fellow students, lecturers, and IT support. On the platform presented, social communication is offered in the form of a live chat, a discussion forum, and an online video meeting. Digital twin (DT) was chosen as a key approach for implementing teleoperation. DT is a digital presentation of a physical world object, serving as a bridge between the physical and cyber world [13]. DTs enable monitoring and operation of physical equipment, production lines, factories, and smart cities independent of location. In this context, DTs enable students to perform practical exercises by teleoperating robots physically located in a university laboratory. The platform includes DTs of mobile, industrial, collaborative, and scara robots for teleoperation. Bi-directional open communication standards are utilized to link digital and physical twins. The digital presentation features a dashboard for controlling and monitoring physical twins. To provide a near real-time view for the teleoperation, a video stream of a physical environment is embedded in the digital presentation.

2. Digital Twin

The concept of Digital Twin (DT) was presented in 2002 by Michael Grieves as a conceptual idea for Product Lifecycle Management [17][14]. Grieves presented virtual and real systems having a link throughout all phases of the product lifecycle from design to disposal. Since then the DT definition has been evolving, and misinterceptions of the “twin” metaphor have existed [18][15]. In this papDer, definitions presented by Cimino and Kritzinger are considered as guideline definitions for DT. Cimino defines DT as a virtual copy of a physical system able to interact in a bi-directional way [19][16]. According to Kritzinger, bi-directional automated data flow distinguishes DT from the digital model and digital shadow [20][17]. DT has been utilized in the analysis, monitoring, maintenance, engineering, and testing [21][18]. DTs can be used to represent a single system such as a CNC machine, industrial robot, welding equipment, autonomous vehicle, or larger entities such as oil refinery or chemical plant [21][18]. DT enables a user to interact with low-level functions available on the physical part of the twin. A physical twin is an actual system put together to perform a certain function. Digital twin as a digital presentation of physical twin can present physical parameters such as temperatures, linear positions, and vibration frequencies in digital format. DT enables user interaction with the physical twin, providing operator teleoperation capabilities [22][19]. Teleoperation enables operators to control robots over large physical distances [22,23][19][20]. In the context of this paper, DTs enable control of physical robot cells, providing a method for teleoperation. Digital Twin consortium provides glossary [24][21] of DT-related terms. The following terms will be used in our paper later on and are explained here:
  • Digital twin is a virtual presentation of real-world entities and processes, synchronized at specified frequency and fidelity
  • Physical twin is a set of real-world entities and processes that correspond to a digital twin
  • Digital twin platform is a set of integrated services, applications, and other digital twin subsystems that are designed to be used to implement digital twin systems
  • Digital twin system is a system-of-systems that implements digital twin
  • Cyber-Physical system is a system consisting of physical and digital systems integrated via networking.
DT concept is now in its third generation where AI and deep learning algorithms utilize online data [25,26][22][23]. First generation DTs were virtual presentations based on scripting languages and second generation of DTs introduced in 2012 were more simulation-oriented [25][22]. In addition to presenting individual systems, DTs are capable of combining individual DTs to present complete factories, supply chains, airports, and smart cities [21,25][18][22]. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has defined standards for the DT framework in 2021 [27][24], and standardization is an indication of DT as a mature concept. Deep-learning can enable DTs to self-optimize and thus advance autonomously [25,26][22][23]. A cyber attack against a DT may enable an attacker to gain access to physical twin [14][25]. Therefore, unauthorized modification or destruction of data can lead to unexpected behavior of physical twin, leading to catastrophic damages [14,28][25][26]. According to Holmes et al. [28][26], the amount of CS attacks against DTs are increasing. Integrity and confidentiality of data transfer between physical and digital twins are identified as the main CS challenge for DTs [28][26], as CS attacks disrupting the integrity or confidentiality of data might endanger the safety of the physical twin environment.

Data Flow between Physical and Digital Twin

DT definition requires automated bi-directional data flow between physical and digital parts [20][17]. Synchronized data transfer from individual sensors to digital presentation and from digital presentation to individual actuators is a key enabler of DT concept [19][16]. This enables users to monitor and control physical twin by a user interface of a digital twin. Furthermore, the data flow of individual DTs can be combined to represent complete factories or complete supply chains [25][22]. Connecting individual DTs to present larger entities, a common platform is required. A common platform utilizing open connection standards enables flexible combining of DTs. Currently, OPC Unified Architecture (OPC UA) is a widely adopted open standard cross-platform solution for data exchange [29][27]. OPC UA client-server model has lately been accompanied by publisher–subscriber solutions developed for IoT such as Message Queue Telemetry Transport (MQTT). MQTT, originally developed by Andy Standford-Clark and Arlen Nipper [30][28], is considered one of the most popular messaging protocols for IoT- and IIoT-devices [31][29]. MQTT has been widely adopted in logistics, automotive, manufacturing, and smart home applications. MQTT protocol has three participants: publisher, subscriber, and broker. A publisher is a device publishing certain topics such as temperature and humidity. A subscriber is a device subscribing to certain topics to receive information. Both are connected to a broker to deliver published topics to subscribers [31][29]. MQTT was not originally designed with CS in mind. Current MQTT-versions 3.1.1 and 5 offer authentication as a measure against CS attacks. To encrypt MQTT messaging Transport Layer Security (TLS) is needed and is supported by some MQTT implementations [31][29]. Authentication and encryption provide strong protection against CS attacks. MQTT meets requirements F1, F2, and N3 of digital twins, teleoperation, and CS. OPC Unified Architecture is a cross-platform open standard IEC62541 for data exchange. The standard is actively developed by independent committee OPC Foundation [32][30]. The history of OPC (OLE For Process Control) began when Microsoft introduced the BackOffice suite of server products in 1996 [33][31]. OPC UA standard defined in 2006 is widely recognized in industrial automation and has been chosen as Industry 4.0 reference standard [29,34][27][32]. In 2018, part 14 was added to define publisher/subscriber communication model in addition to client/server model [35][33]. MQTT, AMQP, and UADP messaging protocols are currently supported to offer publisher/subscriber communications to OPC UA. OPC UA standard is secure-by-design, providing confidentiality and integrity by signing and encrypting messages [14][25]. Basic security provided by username and password authentication can be extended with encryption to enable a high level of CS.

3. Teleoperation

Teleoperation of robots has been studied for decades since the beginning of robotic systems in the 1950s [36][34]. MIT started to study teleoperation in the mid-1960s and the mid-1990s when prof. Sheridan reported progress in the field of teleoperation in several countries and application areas including space, undersea, mines, toxic waste cleanup, telediagnosis, and telesurgery [37,38][35][36]. Since then, teleoperation applications have been researched for healthcare [23,39[20][37][38],40], industrial [41][39], education [5[5][10],10], underwater [42][40], nuclear [43][41], and energy applications [44][42]. González et al. [41][39] proposed a teleoperation system to control industrial robots. The system proposed allows the operator to perform finishing, sanding, deburring, and grinding operations, which are hard to do with industrial robots. By using teleoperation it is possible to preserve the physical integrity of human work and to allow people with motor disabilities to perform grinding and sanding processes. A teleoperated robotic system for healthcare performing ultrasound scanning was presented by Duan et al. [39][37]. Tests were conducted and proven that using teleoperated robots to take ultrasound was safe and effective [39][37]. Caiza et al. [44][42] used the lightweight protocol MQTT for the teleoperation of robots. An operator can be in a different location and control the robot movements and actions remotely. In the application proposed by Caiza et al., an operator can control a mobile manipulator to perform inspections on oil and gas equipment [44][42].

Real-Time Video

Low latency of real-time video transmission is critical in teleoperation applications [45][43]. Delay in video transmission has a negative impact on user experience and may cause the user to misguide teleoperated equipment. Web Real-Time communication project (WebRTC) is an open-source project offering near real-time web-based communication [46][44]. Most modern web browsers support WebRTC, and Round Trip Times of 80 to 100 milliseconds have been measured on mobile platforms [47][45]. WebRTC utilizes User Datagram Protocol (UDP) for video streaming. Since UDP does not support congestion control, a custom congestion control algorithm is required to control the video stream.

4. Authentication and Authorization

Methods to authorize platform users and define user permissions are needed. Most modern CMSs’ provide described functionality and also tools for website content management [48][46]. CMS provides schemes and front-end for user registration, strong password creation, password authentication, and password recovery. Currently, three major open-source CMS solutions are WordPress, Joomla, and Drupal [49][47]. A wide variety of third-party plug-ins are available for mentioned three major CMS. Plug-ins can add features such as calendars, clocks, and photo galleries to CMS [48][46]. To allow registered users to log in to all services on the platform with a single username and password, a single sign-on (SSO) method is required. Single sign-on allows registered users to log in once and access all services on the platform. Open Authorization 2.0 (OAuth 2.0) is a token-based open standard for authentication and authorization [50][48]. OAuth 2.0 is a widely utilized standard in Internet communications utilized by Google, Amazon, and Paypal [51][49]. Traditional server–client style authentication is based on sharing credentials between resource owner and client. Sharing credentials with clients can lead to password leaks, data breaches, and unwanted access to protected resources [50][48]. OAuth 2.0 differs from traditional server–client style authentication by passing access tokens instead of credentials from the authentication server to the client. OAuth 2.0 enables users to utilize all services on the platform by creating single credentials on Drupal CMS.

References

  1. 2022 Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community. Available online: https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/ATA-2022-Unclassified-Report.pdf (accessed on 2 May 2022).
  2. Ashour, A.G.; Mirou, S.M.; Hassan, R.N.; Zeiada, W.; Abuzwidah, M.; Shanableh, A. Assessment of Potential Temperature Increases in The UAE due to Future Global Warming. In Proceedings of the 2022 Advances in Science and Engineering Technology International Conferences (ASET), Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 21–24 February 2022; pp. 1–6.
  3. Ariza, J.Á.; Gil, S.G. RaspyLab: A low-cost remote laboratory to learn programming and physical computing through Python and Raspberry Pi. IEEE Rev. Iberoam. Tecnol. Aprendiz. 2022, 17, 140–149.
  4. Baburajan, P.K.; Noushad, S.; Faisal, T.; Awawdeh, M. Online Teaching and Learning: Effectiveness and Challenges. In Proceedings of the 2022 Advances in Science and Engineering Technology International Conferences (ASET), Dubai, United Arab Emirates, 21–24 February 2022; pp. 1–6.
  5. Guc, F.; Viola, J.; Chen, Y. Digital Twins Enabled Remote Laboratory Learning Experience for Mechatronics Education. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE 1st International Conference on Digital Twins and Parallel Intelligence (DTPI), Beijing, China, 15 July–15 August 2021; pp. 242–245.
  6. Larrondo-Petrie, M.M.; Zapata-Rivera, L.F.; Aranzazu-Suescun, C.; Sanchez-Viloria, J.A.; Molina-Peña, A.E.; Santana-Santana, K.S. Addressing the need for online engineering labs for developing countries. In Proceedings of the 2021 World Engineering Education Forum/Global Engineering Deans Council (WEEF/GEDC), Madrid, Spain, 15–18 November 2021; pp. 387–396.
  7. Onime, C.E.; Uhomoibhi, J.O. Engineering education in a developing country: Experiences from Africa. In Proceedings of the 2012 15th International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), Villach, Austria, 26–28 September 2012; pp. 1–3.
  8. Bryndin, E. System Synergetic Formation of Society 5.0 for Development of Vital Spaces on Basis of Ecological Economic and Social Programs. Ann. Ecol. Environ. Sci. 2018, 2, 12–19.
  9. Moniruzzaman, M.; Rassau, A.; Chai, D.; Islam, S.M.S. Teleoperation methods and enhancement techniques for mobile robots: A comprehensive survey. Robot. Auton. Syst. 2022, 150, 103973.
  10. Marín, R.; Sanz, P.; Nebot, P.; Esteller, R.; Wirz, R. Multirobot System Architecture & Performance Issues for the UJI Robotics TeleLab. IFAC Proc. Vol. 2004, 37, 53–58.
  11. Rambe, P.; Bere, A. Using mobile instant messaging to leverage learner participation and transform pedagogy at a South African University of Technology. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2013, 44, 544–561.
  12. Tang, Y.; Hew, K.F. Is mobile instant messaging (MIM) useful in education? Examining its technological, pedagogical, and social affordances. Educ. Res. Rev. 2017, 21, 85–104.
  13. Qi, Q.; Tao, F. Digital Twin and Big Data Towards Smart Manufacturing and Industry 4.0: 360 Degree Comparison. IEEE Access 2018, 6, 3585–3593.
  14. Grieves, M. Origins of the Digital Twin Concept; 2016; Unpublished.
  15. Grieves, M. Excerpt From Forthcoming Paper Intelligent Digital Twins and the Development and Management of Complex Systems The “Digital Twin Exists ONLY After There Is A Physical Product” Fallacy. 2021. Available online: https://digitaltwin1.org/articles/2-8 (accessed on 7 April 2022).
  16. Cimino, C.; Negri, E.; Fumagalli, L. Review of digital twin applications in manufacturing. Comput. Ind. 2019, 113, 103130.
  17. Kritzinger, W.; Karner, M.; Traar, G.; Henjes, J.; Sihn, W. Digital Twin in manufacturing: A categorical literature review and classification. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2018, 51, 1016–1022.
  18. Alcaraz, C.; Lopez, J. Digital Twin: A Comprehensive Survey of Security Threats. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 2022. early access.
  19. Protic, A.; Jin, Z.; Marian, R.; Abd, K.; Campbell, D.; Chahl, J. Implementation of a Bi-Directional Digital Twin for Industry 4 Labs in Academia: A Solution Based on OPC UA. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), Singapore, 14–17 December 2020; pp. 979–983.
  20. Laaki, H.; Miche, Y.; Tammi, K. Prototyping a Digital Twin for Real Time Remote Control Over Mobile Networks: Application of Remote Surgery. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 20325–20336.
  21. Digital Twin Consortium. Glossary of Digital Twins. 2021. Available online: https://www.digitaltwinconsortium.org/glossary/glossary.html#digital-twin (accessed on 15 February 2022).
  22. Gomez, F. AI-Driven Digital Twins and the Future of Smart Manufacturing. 2021. Available online: https://www.machinedesign.com/automation-iiot/article/21170513/aidriven-digital-twins-and-the-future-of-smart-manufacturing (accessed on 30 April 2022).
  23. How Digital Twins Are Driving the Future of Engineering. 2021. Available online: https://www.nokia.com/networks/insights/technology/how-digital-twins-driving-future-of-engineering/ (accessed on 30 April 2022).
  24. ISO 23247-1:2021; Automation Systems and Integration—Digital Twin Framework for Manufacturing—Part 1: Overview and General Principles. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2000.
  25. Mullet, V.; Sondi, P.; Ramat, E. A Review of Cybersecurity Guidelines for Manufacturing Factories in Industry 4.0. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 23235–23263.
  26. Holmes, D.; Papathanasaki, M.; Maglaras, L.; Ferrag, M.A.; Nepal, S.; Janicke, H. Digital Twins and Cyber Security—Solution or challenge? In Proceedings of the 2021 6th South-East Europe Design Automation, Computer Engineering, Computer Networks and Social Media Conference (SEEDA-CECNSM), Preveza, Greece, 24–26 September 2021.
  27. Mühlbauer, N.; Kirdan, E.; Pahl, M.O.; Carle, G. Open-Source OPC UA Security and Scalability. In Proceedings of the 2020 25th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA), Vienna, Austria, 8–11 September 2020; Volume 1, pp. 262–269.
  28. IBM. Transcript of IBM Podcast. 2011. Available online: https://www.ibm.com/podcasts/software/websphere/connectivity/piper_diaz_nipper_mq_tt_11182011.pdf (accessed on 22 February 2022).
  29. Alkhafajee, A.R.; Al-Muqarm, A.M.A.; Alwan, A.H.; Mohammed, Z.R. Security and Performance Analysis of MQTT Protocol with TLS in IoT Networks. In Proceedings of the 2021 4th International Iraqi Conference on Engineering Technology and Their Applications (IICETA), Najaf, Iraq, 21–22 September 2021; pp. 206–211.
  30. OPC Foundation. What Is OPC? Available online: https://opcfoundation.org/about/what-is-opc/ (accessed on 29 March 2022).
  31. Blackwell, R. Microsoft Solutions for Manufacturing Industry. In Proceedings of the IEE Colloquium on Next Generation Manufacturing: Future Trends in Manufacturing and Supply Chain Management (Digest No: 1996/278), London, UK, 22 November 1996.
  32. Drahoš, P.; Kučera, E.; Haffner, O.; Klimo, I. Trends in industrial communication and OPC UA. In Proceedings of the 2018 Cybernetics Informatics (K & I), Lazy pod Makytou, Slovakia, 31 January–3 February 2018; pp. 1–5.
  33. OPC Unified Architecture Specification, Part14: PubSub. 2018. Available online: https://reference.opcfoundation.org/v104/Core/docs/Part14/ (accessed on 20 February 2022).
  34. Goertz, R.C. Fundamentals of General-Purpose Remote Manipulators. Nucleonics 1952, 10, 36–42.
  35. Ferrell, W.R.; Sheridan, T.B. Supervisory control of remote manipulation. IEEE Spectr. 1967, 4, 81–88.
  36. Sheridan, T. Teleoperation, telerobotics and telepresence: A progress report. Control Eng. Pract. 1995, 3, 205–214.
  37. Duan, B.; Xiong, L.; Guan, X.; Fu, Y.; Zhang, Y. Tele-operated robotic ultrasound system for medical diagnosis. Biomed. Signal Process. Control 2021, 70, 102900.
  38. Taylor, R.; Funda, J.; Eldridge, B.; Gomory, S.; Gruben, K.; LaRose, D.; Talamini, M.; Kavoussi, L.; Anderson, J. A telerobotic assistant for laparoscopic surgery. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag. 1995, 14, 279–288.
  39. González, C.; Solanes, J.E.; Muñoz, A.; Gracia, L.; Girbés-Juan, V.; Tornero, J. Advanced teleoperation and control system for industrial robots based on augmented virtuality and haptic feedback. J. Manuf. Syst. 2021, 59, 283–298.
  40. Yoerger, D.; Slotine, J.J. Supervisory control architecture for underwater teleoperation. In Proceedings of the 1987 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Raleigh, NC, USA, 31 March–3 April 1987; Volume 4, pp. 2068–2073.
  41. Clement, G.; Vertut, J.; Fournier, R.; Espiau, B.; Andre, G. An overview of CAT control in nuclear services. In Proceedings of the 1985 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, St. Louis, MO, USA, 25–28 March 1985; Volume 2, pp. 713–718.
  42. Caiza, G.; Garcia, C.A.; Naranjo, J.E.; Garcia, M.V. Flexible robotic teleoperation architecture for intelligent oil fields. Heliyon 2020, 6, e03833.
  43. Shu, B.; Arnarson, H.; Solvang, B.; Kaarlela, T.; Pieskä, S. Platform independent interface for programming of industrial robots. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE/SICE International Symposium on System Integration (SII), Narvik, Norway, 9–12 January 2022; pp. 797–802.
  44. Eltenahy, S.; Fayez, N.; Obayya, M.; Khalifa, F. Comparative Analysis of Resources Utilization in Some Open-Source Videoconferencing Applications based on WebRTC. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Telecommunications Conference (ITC-Egypt), Alexandria, Egypt, 13–15 July 2021; pp. 1–4.
  45. Jansen, B.; Goodwin, T.; Gupta, V.; Kuipers, F.; Zussman, G. Performance Evaluation of WebRTC-based Video Conferencing. ACM SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev. 2018, 45, 56–68.
  46. Patel, S.K.; Rathod, V.; Parikh, S. Joomla, Drupal and WordPress—A statistical comparison of open source CMS. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Trendz in Information Sciences Computing (TISC2011), Chennai, India, 8–9 December 2011; pp. 182–187.
  47. Kumar, A.; Kumar, A.; Hashmi, H.; Khan, S.A. WordPress: A Multi-Functional Content Management System. In Proceedings of the 2021 10th International Conference on System Modeling Advancement in Research Trends (SMART), Moradabad, India, 10–11 December 2021; pp. 158–161.
  48. Naveed Aman, M.; Taneja, S.; Sikdar, B.; Chua, K.C.; Alioto, M. Token-Based Security for the Internet of Things With Dynamic Energy-Quality Tradeoff. IEEE Internet Things J. 2019, 6, 2843–2859.
  49. Mainka, C.; Mladenov, V.; Schwenk, J.; Wich, T. SoK: Single Sign-On Security—An Evaluation of OpenID Connect. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS P), Paris, France, 26–28 April 2017; pp. 251–266.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Video Production Service
Feedback