Paper Title: Mid-air Pan-and-Zoom on Wall-sized Displays
Authors: Mathieu Nancel, Julie Wagner, Emmanuel Pietriga, Olivier Chapuis and Wendy Mackay
Author Bios:
Mathieu Nancel: is currently a PhD student in HCI in the University of Paris - Sud XI under the supervision of Michel Beaudouin-Lafon and Emmanuel Pietriga.
Julie Wagner: is a PhD student in the insity lab in Paris, working on new tangible interfaces and new interaction paradigms at large public displays
Emmanuel Pietriga: is currently a full-time research scientist working for INRIA Saclay-lie-de-France. He is also the interim leader of INRIA team In Situ.
Olivier Chapuis: is a research scientist at LRI. He is also a member of and team co-head of the In Situ research team.
Wendy Mackay: is a Research Director with INRIA Saclay in France, though currently on sabbatical at Stanford University. She is in charge of the research group, In Situ.
Presentation Venue: CHI '11 Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems that took place at New York (ACM)
Summary:
Hypothesis: The main hypothesis of the paper is that there is a need for more research on complex tasks when dealing with high resolution wall-sized displays. The authors made seven smaller hypotheses about how people best interact with tools. The authors had 7 separate hypotheses about each particular area of their design, but I combined this to make one general hypothesis.
How the hypothesis was tested: The authors conducted a series of pilot tests, pursued research, and performed empirical studies to narrow down all possible gesture and input methods for this system down to 12. They took into account performance (cost and accuracy), fatigue over periods of use of the input, ease of use, and natural mapping. The authors conducted an experiment to evaluate each of the 12 factors they discussed using in their system to see which were optimal. THe authors had their ideas about which of the 12 were optimal to begin with, but they tested their ideas to see if this was the case.
Results: After the experiment, the authors found that the two-handed gesture tasks were performed faster than the one-handed gesture tasks, involving smaller muscle groups for input interactions improves performance (providing higher guidance further improves it), and linearly-performed tasks were generally performed faster than circular ones. Circular gestures were slower because it was more often that participants overshot their target with circular gestures than with linear ones. After receiving feedback from the participants, they found that what the users were saying was in agreeance with their results from the gathered data.
Discussion:
Effectiveness: This paper was pretty interesting in the terms of field of study which has a lot of real-world applications such as crisis management/response, large-scale construction, and security management areas. Their sutdies were accurate, appropriate and extensive enough to gather relevant and meaningful data for designing a suitable system for the display. They definitely achieved their goals.
Authors: Mathieu Nancel, Julie Wagner, Emmanuel Pietriga, Olivier Chapuis and Wendy Mackay
Author Bios:
Mathieu Nancel: is currently a PhD student in HCI in the University of Paris - Sud XI under the supervision of Michel Beaudouin-Lafon and Emmanuel Pietriga.
Julie Wagner: is a PhD student in the insity lab in Paris, working on new tangible interfaces and new interaction paradigms at large public displays
Emmanuel Pietriga: is currently a full-time research scientist working for INRIA Saclay-lie-de-France. He is also the interim leader of INRIA team In Situ.
Olivier Chapuis: is a research scientist at LRI. He is also a member of and team co-head of the In Situ research team.
Wendy Mackay: is a Research Director with INRIA Saclay in France, though currently on sabbatical at Stanford University. She is in charge of the research group, In Situ.
Presentation Venue: CHI '11 Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems that took place at New York (ACM)
Summary:
Hypothesis: The main hypothesis of the paper is that there is a need for more research on complex tasks when dealing with high resolution wall-sized displays. The authors made seven smaller hypotheses about how people best interact with tools. The authors had 7 separate hypotheses about each particular area of their design, but I combined this to make one general hypothesis.
How the hypothesis was tested: The authors conducted a series of pilot tests, pursued research, and performed empirical studies to narrow down all possible gesture and input methods for this system down to 12. They took into account performance (cost and accuracy), fatigue over periods of use of the input, ease of use, and natural mapping. The authors conducted an experiment to evaluate each of the 12 factors they discussed using in their system to see which were optimal. THe authors had their ideas about which of the 12 were optimal to begin with, but they tested their ideas to see if this was the case.
Results: After the experiment, the authors found that the two-handed gesture tasks were performed faster than the one-handed gesture tasks, involving smaller muscle groups for input interactions improves performance (providing higher guidance further improves it), and linearly-performed tasks were generally performed faster than circular ones. Circular gestures were slower because it was more often that participants overshot their target with circular gestures than with linear ones. After receiving feedback from the participants, they found that what the users were saying was in agreeance with their results from the gathered data.
Discussion:
Effectiveness: This paper was pretty interesting in the terms of field of study which has a lot of real-world applications such as crisis management/response, large-scale construction, and security management areas. Their sutdies were accurate, appropriate and extensive enough to gather relevant and meaningful data for designing a suitable system for the display. They definitely achieved their goals.
No comments:
Post a Comment