When Output meets Input…

Matthias RauterbergDepartment Industrial Design

Technical University EindhovenThe Netherlands, 2005

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

2/34

Matter

Information Energy

Attention

Gravity

Access?

Most Important Design Constrains

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

3/34

Output Space (system’s view)– The physical space where the

user’s [visual] attention is.Perception Space (user’s view)

Input Space (system’s view)– The physical space where the

user’s motor actions are.Action Space (user’s view)

input space= action space

output space= perception space

Visual Output Space and Input Space

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

4/34

How to design visual Output Space and Input Space in 2D?

MSc Thesis (1993) from Christian Cachin

Ref: Rauterberg, M. & Cachin, C. (1993). Locating the primary attention focus of the user. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 733, pp. 129-140.

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

5/34

Signal Detection Experiment (SDE)

time (ms)0 500 1000

circles

circles + signal (X or square)

N = 19; 11 women and 8 men took part in the experiment (mean age: 33 ± 14 years). 12 subjects were students of computer science at the ETH.

Dual task approach: (1) count circles, (2) detect signal X (given a distractor [])

Standard computer display: 14 inch, black&white

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

6/34

SDE Results: primary task‘Circle Deviation’ CD as a measure for task accuracy:

CD = |#CIRCLEScounted – #CIRCLESpresented| * 100% / #CIRCLESpresented

I II

III IV

CD=6.1% CD=6.8%

CD = 4.4%CD=6.9%Main Results:Quadrant IV outperforms all others

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

7/34

SDE Results: secondary task

0 3 6 90

10

20

30

40 [X] vs [no signal][X] vs [no signal or square]

Distance (inch)

‘Error Ratio’ ER:ER = (b + c) / (a + d) * 100%

Signal Detection Table:

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

8/34

Eye Recording Experiment (ERE)

PC

video camera

video recoder

NAC Eye Mark Recorder IV

mouse

projection screen overhead display subject

How to determine automatically the actual position of the user’s visual attention focus on a computer screen?

Subjects:N=6: 2 women and 4 men5 subjects were students of computer science at the ETH. 1 subject studied psychology at Uni Zurich.

Tasks:(1) Computer game; (2) Text formatting;(3) Hypertext navigation.

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

9/34

fixation region:= circle around fixation point with r = 3 inch

(1) without mouse operations: Mouse position in fixation region for 25% - 70%

(2) with mouse operations: Mouse position in fixation region for 49% - 97%

ERE Results

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

10/34

Design Recommendations

Outputspace

Input space

(1) Place e.g. the message left above the actual user’s focus of attention;(2) Place this message maximal 3 inch away of actual mouse position.

OS := Output SpaceIS := Input Space

Results:α ~ 135 grad∆ |OS-IS| < 3 inch

α∆

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

11/34

The Digital Desk from Pierre Wellner in 1991

Pierre Wellner

[00:05:88]

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

12/34

• Output Space– The physical space

where the user’s visual attention is.• Input Space

– The physical spacewhere the user’s motor actions are.

• Design Principle:– output space and input space must

coincide! [∆ =0]– “Interlacing the display and

manipulation space”(Djajadiningrat, 1998, TU Delft)input space

output space

∆

How to design Output Space and Input Space in 3D?

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

13/34

Tic-Tac-Toe with four interaction styles

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

14/34

[00:01:54]

User reactions with the DigitalPlayingDesk (1995)

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

15/34

Empirical Results : game playing time per dialog technique

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Cel

l Mea

n fo

r tim

e of

use

r (s)

Cell Line Chart for "playing time"

Grouping Variable(s): Interface type

Error Bars: ± 1 Standard Deviation(s)

CI MI TI DPDP<.001P<.01P<.001

P<.001P<.001

P<.001

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

16/34

computer win

remis

user win Cell Line Chart for "winning chance"

Grouping Variable(s): Interface type

Error Bars: ± 1 Standard Deviation(s)

CI MI TI DPDP<.001P<.080P<.020

P<.802P<.001

P<.007

Empirical Results : winning chance per dialog technique

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

17/34

Design Recommendations(1) Output space and Input Space should maximally intersect.(2) Tangible interaction props do not interfere with primary task.

OS := Output SpaceIS := Input SpaceWS := Work Space

Result:WS = OS ∪ IS with max [OS3

visual ∩ IS3visual ]

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

18/34

The Build-It SystemFjeld, Bichsel & Rauterberg 1997

PhD Thesis (2001) from Morten Fjeld

[00:02:44]

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

19/34

Build-It: tangible interaction props

2D

3D

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

20/34

Interaction Props: user studyProps design factors:form, size, material and metaphor:

•An experiment was carried out to explore different design strategies.

•Tasks were based on initial planning of an interior architecture.

•Focus of the experiment was subjective opinion (n=12) about the bricks.

•The bricks were ranked by user performance before (first number) and after(second number) task solving activity.

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

21/34

Build-It: Spin-outs in Europe, Canada & JapanIPO

OMRON, Japan (2004)

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

22/34

[00:06:14]

Build-It: The PlanningTable in Japan by OMRON Inc.

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

23/34

Interaction ModelsBrygg Ullmer & Hiroshi Ishii, 2000

model

control view

INPUT OUTPUT

physical

digitalmodel

control Non graspablerepresentation

graspablerepresentation

INPUT / OUTPUT

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

24/34

How to design interaction props for 3D navigation?

PhD Thesis (2004) from Sriram Subramanian

2D interaction: 3D interaction:

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

25/34

VIP-3: Tangible Interaction PropsAliakseyeu, Subramaniam, Martens & Rauterberg 2002

[00:06:22]

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

26/34

Trends in Interactive System Technology

Mobile computing

Ambient rooms and Cooperative buildings

Transport [00:06:25]

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

27/34

Design Metaphors

Channel

Tool

Substitute

long time ago 2000 history

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

28/34

Trend in Interface Design

0

50

100

150

1970-1990 1990-2010 2010-

SW controlsHW controls

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

29/34

time1900 2000

mechanical style

electronic style

mechatronic styleDesign Styles

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

30/34

time1900 2000

mechanical style

electronic style

mechatronic styleactive forms(smart memory alloys)

given forms(ubiquituous computing)

channel forms(e.g. PC, TV, Radio, etc)

connected forms(ambient intelligence)

dedicated forms(e.g. typewriter, etc)

Design Forms

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

31/34

HomeLab: The Memory Browservan den Hoven, Eggen & Rauterberg, 2003

[00:01:09]

RFID tagged souvenirs

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

32/34

Interaction Props with Active Form

unloaded state loaded stateNitinol tubes

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

33/34

If Output meets Input:interactive holography might be the final solution

projection

smoke curtain (e.g. FogScreen)

© Matthias Rauterberg, 2005

34/34

Thank you for your attention.