• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.79-94
• /
• 2013

Recently, the high value added business is steadily growing in the culture and art area. To generated high value from a performance, the satisfaction of audience is necessary. The flow in a critical factor for satisfaction, and it should be induced from audience and measures. To evaluate interest and emotion of audience on contents, producers or investors need a kind of index for the measurement of the flow. But it is neither easy to define the flow quantitatively, nor to collect audience's reaction immediately. The previous studies of the group flow were evaluated by the sum of the average value of each person's reaction. The flow or "good feeling" from each audience was extracted from his face, especially, the change of his (or her) expression and body movement. But it was not easy to handle the large amount of real-time data from each sensor signals. And also it was difficult to set experimental devices, in terms of economic and environmental problems. Because, all participants should have their own personal sensor to check their physical signal. Also each camera should be located in front of their head to catch their looks. Therefore we need more simple system to analyze group flow. This study provides the method for measurement of audiences flow with group synchronization at same time and place. To measure the synchronization, we made real-time processing system using the Differential Image and Group Emotion Analysis (GEA) system. Differential Image was obtained from camera and by the previous frame was subtracted from present frame. So the movement variation on audience's reaction was obtained. And then we developed a program, GEX(Group Emotion Analysis), for flow judgment model. After the measurement of the audience's reaction, the synchronization is divided as Dynamic State Synchronization and Static State Synchronization. The Dynamic State Synchronization accompanies audience's active reaction, while the Static State Synchronization means to movement of audience. The Dynamic State Synchronization can be caused by the audience's surprise action such as scary, creepy or reversal scene. And the Static State Synchronization was triggered by impressed or sad scene. Therefore we showed them several short movies containing various scenes mentioned previously. And these kind of scenes made them sad, clap, and creepy, etc. To check the movement of audience, we defined the critical point, ${\alpha}$and ${\beta}$. Dynamic State Synchronization was meaningful when the movement value was over critical point ${\beta}$, while Static State Synchronization was effective under critical point ${\alpha}$. ${\beta}$ is made by audience' clapping movement of 10 teams in stead of using average number of movement. After checking the reactive movement of audience, the percentage(%) ratio was calculated from the division of "people having reaction" by "total people". Total 37 teams were made in "2012 Seoul DMC Culture Open" and they involved the experiments. First, they followed induction to clap by staff. Second, basic scene for neutralize emotion of audience. Third, flow scene was displayed to audience. Forth, the reversal scene was introduced. And then 24 teams of them were provided with amuse and creepy scenes. And the other 10 teams were exposed with the sad scene. There were clapping and laughing action of audience on the amuse scene with shaking their head or hid with closing eyes. And also the sad or touching scene made them silent. If the results were over about 80%, the group could be judged as the synchronization and the flow were achieved. As a result, the audience showed similar reactions about similar stimulation at same time and place. Once we get an additional normalization and experiment, we can obtain find the flow factor through the synchronization on a much bigger group and this should be useful for planning contents.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.171-178
• /
• 2016

Purpose : In order to minimize the dose of femoral head as an appropriate treatment plan for rectal cancer radiation therapy, we compare and evaluate the usefulness of 3-field 3D conformal radiation therapy(below 3fCRT), which is a universal treatment method, and 5-field 3D conformal radiation therapy(below 5fCRT), and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT). Materials and Methods : The 10 cases of rectal cancer that treated with 21EX were enrolled. Those cases were planned by Eclipse(Ver. 10.0.42, Varian, USA), PRO3(Progressive Resolution Optimizer 10.0.28) and AAA(Anisotropic Analytic Algorithm Ver. 10.0.28). 3fCRT and 5fCRT plan has $0^{\circ}$, $270^{\circ}$, $90^{\circ}$ and $0^{\circ}$, $95^{\circ}$, $45^{\circ}$, $315^{\circ}$, $265^{\circ}$ gantry angle, respectively. VMAT plan parameters consisted of 15MV coplanar $360^{\circ}$ 1 arac. Treatment prescription was employed delivering 54Gy to recum in 30 fractions. To minimize the dose difference that shows up randomly on optimizing, VMAT plans were optimized and calculated twice, and normalized to the target V100%=95%. The indexes of evaluation are D of Both femoral head and aceta fossa, total MU, H.I.(Homogeneity index) and C.I.(Conformity index) of the PTV. All VMAT plans were verified by gamma test with portal dosimetry using EPID. Results : D of Rt. femoral head was 53.08 Gy, 50.27 Gy, and 30.92 Gy, respectively, in the order of 3fCRT, 5fCRT, and VMAT treatment plan. Likewise, Lt. Femoral head showed average 53.68 Gy, 51.01 Gy and 29.23 Gy in the same order. D of Rt. aceta fossa was 54.86 Gy, 52.40 Gy, 30.37 Gy, respectively, in the order of 3fCRT, 5fCRT, and VMAT treatment plan. Likewise, Lt. Femoral head showed average 53.68 Gy, 51.01 Gy and 29.23 Gy in the same order. The maximum dose of both femoral head and aceta fossa was higher in the order of 3fCRT, 5fCRT, and VMAT treatment plan. C.I. showed the lowest VMAT treatment plan with an average of 1.64, 1.48, and 0.99 in the order of 3fCRT, 5fCRT, and VMAT treatment plan. There was no significant difference on H.I. of the PTV among three plans. Total MU showed that the VMAT treatment plan used 124.4MU and 299MU more than the 3fCRT and 5fCRT treatment plan, respectively. IMRT verification gamma test results for the VMAT plan passed over 90.0% at 2mm/2%. Conclusion : In rectal cancer treatment, the VMAT plan was shown to be advantageous in most of the evaluation indexes compared to the 3D plan, and the dose of the femoral head was greatly reduced. However, because of practical limitations there may be a case where it is difficult to select a VMAT treatment plan. 5fCRT has the advantage of reducing the dose of the femoral head as compared to the existing 3fCRT, without regard to additional problems. Therefore, not only would it extend survival time but the quality of life in general, if hospitals improved radiation therapy efficiency by selecting the treatment plan in accordance with the hospital's situation.