[Cam] capture

C# Webcam Capture

OpenCV
DirectShow.NET
in Java

weekly report (7/17-8/13)

• reading papers:
  
• 
  
• reading UI books
• Ch3
  
• complete BPs and E-pitch
  
• Longterm: glasses
  
• YEF: intimate objects
  
• 交接: Geta sandles
  

[vision] IBM veggie vision

VeggieVision: a high-tech version of the bar code scanner that will recognize fruits and vegetables and automatically enter the price into the checkout system

• IBM research: veggie vision
• IBM: green machine
  
• CBS news: veggie vision and smart carts

[MIT] Reflective Mirror

- A mirror which also reflects intangible information about yourself
David Bouchard,Enrico Costanza and Sajid Sadi
MIT media lab
link here
"The goal of this project is to give users insight into their activy patterns by presenting them with an objective daily feedback integrated in a familiar routine context. We also put an emphasis on how to display such data in a subtle way so that it is non-intrusive.
We are investigating several applications of such a technology, including communication with mobile phones to collect behaviour data, face recognition to identify members of a family as well as clothing store application."

weekly report (7/10-7/16)

• reading papers and the book
• paper review
• ARIS
• Concepts that Support Collocated Collaborative Work Inspired by the Specific Context of Industrial Designers
  
• 7/11
• Longterm discussion and survey
• YEF discussion and survey: doing intimate object related
  
• 7/12
• (Longterm) discussion (questionnaire, product) and survey
• (YEF) intimate object discussion and survey, product and logo images, abstract complete
• 7/13
• complete ARIS review
• (YEF) intimate object survey, Business Plan structure
  
• (Longterm) discussion and survey
• 7/14
• (YEF) discussion, visit CEO of 永豐餘 for ideas
  
• 7/15
• (YEF) discussion - products and BP
• (Longterm) complete questionnaire
  
• 7/16
• (YEF) discussion - BP
  
• really sorry that this week is all for 2 competitions, although they are both about ubicomp.
  both deadlines are 7/21, for 30 and 40 pages each, so...
  

[CSCW] Collocated Collaborative Work

Concepts that Support Collocated Collaborative Work
Inspired by the Specific Context of Industrial Designers
H.Wang, E.Blevis
Human-Computer Interaction Design Group, School of Informatics, Indiana University, USA
CSCW 2004

• true:
• designers:
• tend to use large amounts of visual data
• need large workspaces to present information in the way that does not clutter the workspace, but is still easy to view and manipulate all at once
• especially when engaged in activities that involve sketching and annotation, it is imperative that interaction technologies do not impede the dynamic nature of the
  interactions
  
• Insights from observations:
• Seating orientation
• Reach
• Simultaneity
• Use of physical objects
• Large work-surfaces, one concept to a sheet, retrieval and comparison
• Privacy level
• Orientation of Documents
  
• Then they design concepts from observations
• My Thoughts:
• A good paper to understand ways and details of collaboration
• To design a good UI for collaboration, there are lots of things for us to think about and consider - we should match or apply these insights to the system

transparent display

背投式電視(microdisplay-based rear projection TV) v.s. transparent display (actually fake?!)

Nightmarket2006

Organization

Co-chairman
Jackie Lee, Ph.D Candidate : ITRI/NEXT Fellow, MIT Media Laboratory
Wen-Jean Hsueh, Ph.D : Creativity Lab, Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI)
Prof. Hao-Hua Chu, Ph.D : Ubicomp Lab, National Taiwan University
Prof. Taysheng Jeng, Ph.D: Information Architecture Lab, National Cheng Kung University
Project Manager
Ohno Chih-Wen Hsieh : NCTU
Peggy Pei-Yu Chi : Ubicomp Lab, National Taiwan University
Innovation and Legal Consultant
Heather Yi-Hsin Tsai, Lawyer : LLM, Harvard Law School

Our project page: here
news about our project: here

[UI] ARIS

ARIS: An Interface for Application Relocation in an Interactive Space
Jacob T. Biehl and Brian P. Bailey
Dept. of Computer Science, Univ. of Illinois Urbana, IL, USA
Graphics Interface 2004

• ARIS:
• an interactive space window manager
  
• to enable a user to better manage information in an interactive space
• provides an iconic map of the space that enables a user to visually relocate applications among screens
• contribution: provide direct manipulation interface
  
• build on top of Gaia, a middleware OS that manages resources in their Active Space Lab
• iteration I: multiple Low-fidelity prototypes
• users dislike:
• select and drop
• use of a back and forth gesture
• textual list
• users like:
  
• select a button from the title bar
• iconic map interface
• want strong orientation cues
  
• iteration II: revised low-fidelity prototype
• lessons learned:
• enable a user to initiate a window relocation task from a window's title bar
  
• a 2D iconic map of the space may be good enough for window relocation tasks
• provide feedback:
• in the space as a user interacts with the iconic map
• that transcends the end of the relocation task
  
• users believe that the use of an interactive space could enhance collaborative work
  
• ...
  
• My Thoughts:
• although our scenario is different from theirs, and also we want it to be automatic map, however, is the difference big enough? Or we just combine different works together?
• speaking to UI, our original rough idea is almost the same... just that users don't need to orient themselves
• doing rough prototypes => tradeoff: time and results/expectations
• we should really think of a novel and different interface to achieve our goal, or works are too similar, but, this is not easy
  

weekly report (7/3-7/9)

• reading the book: designing the user interface => notes Ch2
  
• reading paper: ARIS
• surveying UI related resources
  

[UI] Ch2 Guidelines, Principles, and Theories

(Designing the User Interface, Ben Shneiderman and Catherine Plaisant, Addison-Wesley, 2004, ISBN 0-321-19786-0)

• 2.2 (specific and practical) Guidelines
• to record insights and guide the efforts of future designers
• the creation of a guiedlines document engages the design community in a lively discussion of input or output formats, action sequences, terminology, and hardware devices.
  
• examples: navigating the interface, organizing the display, getting the user's attention, facilitating data entry
  
• 2.3 (middle-level) Principles
• while guidelines are narrowly focuesd, principles tend to be more fundamental, widely applicable, enduring, and need more clarification.
• no single design can satisfy all users and situations => must characterize
• determine users' skill levels
• "know thy user" - difficult, often undervalued
  
• all design should begin with an understanding of the intended users, including population profiles
• the process of getting to know the users is never ending: much to know, keep changing
• novice of first-time users; knowledgeable intermittent users; expert frequent users
• identify the tasks
• the set of tasks must be determined before design can proceed => task analysis (involve long hours of observing and interviewing users)
• use a matrix of users and task - include frequenicies
• choose an interaction style (blending may be approprate when required tasks and users are diverse)
  
• direct manipulation
• users' tasks can be greatly simplified by visual representation of the world of action
• appealing to novice
  
• menu selection
• read a list of items => select the one most appropriate to their task => observe the effect
• have clear stucture to decision making
• for novice, intermittent users, applealing to frequent users
  
• form fillin (fill in the blanks)
  
• data entry is required
• see a display of related fields => move a cursor among the fields => enter data where desired
• some trainning may be necessary
• appropriate for knowledgeable intermittent users or frequent users
  
• command language
• provide strong feeling of being in control
• error rates are high, training is necessary, retention may be poor
  
• natural language
• limited sucess thus far
  
• provide little context for issuing the next command
• slower, more cumbersome
• knowledgeable users
  
• 8 golden rules of interface design
• strive for consistency
• cater to universal usability
• offer informative feedback
• design dialogs to yield closure
• prevent errors
• permit easy reversal of actions
• support internal locus of control
• reduce short-term memory load
  
• 2.4 (high-level) Theories
• levels of analysis throries
• (top-down nature, convenient, effective in early days with command-line input, but relevant today)
• conceptual level - users' mental level of interactive system
  
• semantic level - decribes the meanings conveyed by user's input and by computer's output display
  
• syntactic level - defines how user actions that convey semantics are assembled into complete sentences that instruct the computer to perform certain tasks
  
• lexical level - deals with device dependencies and with the precise mechanisms by which users specify the syntax
  
• stages-of-action models
• 7 stages of action that users go through in trying to use interactive products (arranged in a cyclic pattern):
  
• forming the goal
• forming the intention
• specifying the action
• executing the action
• perceiving the system state
• interpreting the system state
• evaluating the outcome
  
• 4 principles of good design:
• the state and the action alternatives should be visible
• there should be a good conceptual model with a consistent system image
• the interface should include good mappings that reveal the relationships between stages
• users should receive continuous feedback
  
• critical points where user failures can occur: users...
  
• can form an inadequate goal
• might not find the correct interface object 'cuz of an incomprehensible label or icon
• may not know how to specify or execute a desired action
• may receive inappropriate or misleading feedback
  
• GOMS and the keystroke-level model
• GOMS: goals, operators, methods, and selections rules
• users: begin by formulating goals & subgoals
  => think in terms of operators
  => achieve goals by using methods
• work nicely for describing steps in decision making while carrying out interaction tasks
  
• keystoke-level
• simplified version of GOMS model
  
• Consistency through grammers
• a command language or set of actions should be orderly, predictable, describable by a few rules => easy to learn and retain
• action grammar
• task-action grammar (TAGs)
  
• widget-level theories
• some situation: hard to accept low level of detail
• alternative approach: follow the simplifications made in the higher-level UI building tools
• create a model based on widgets supported in the tools
  
• context-of-use theories
• profound scientific method of experimental and cognitive psychology
• cognitive model of orderly human plans
• physical space became an important notion for those who began to think more about ubiquitous, pervasive, and embedded devices
• other models: emphasize the social environment, motivations of users, or the role of experience
• especially relevant to mobile devices and ubiquitous computing innovations
  
• 2.5 (high-level) Object-Action Interface (OAI) Model
• emphasize on the visual display of user-task objects and actions
• understanding the task => create the metaphoric representations => make the interface actions visible to users
  

[UI] resources

• visit: Designing the User Interface companion website
  
• visit: A summary of priciples for UI designb
• visit: ubicomp2006 workshop - W6 Usable Ubiquitous Computing in Next-Generation Conference Rooms: Design, Evaluation, and Architecture
  
  

[UI] How about our project?

• we should understand what users really need first.
  i'm not sure whether our design really provideｓ a good solution or not.
  our concept is great, and does hit the problem (according to the book about collaboration), but the UI part has a big question mark.
  it will be better to survey / do user study before we just implement.
  
• visibility: according to our current design, will users really look at it? or will they be bothered?
  we can neither ask them to stop working and just watch our system, nor ask them set up every working software as transparent background - that doesn't make sense, not good UI.
  we should provide an UI for users to focus on their work well (see section 1.4)
  
• are there any professors we can consult with about UI in NTU?
  
• (to be continued...)
  

[UI] Ch10 Collaboration

(Designing the User Interface, Ben Shneiderman and Catherine Plaisant, Addison-Wesley, 2004, ISBN 0-321-19786-0)

• 10.1 Introduction
• CSCW (computer-supported cooperative work): new acronym
• still debate whether it includes copperative, collaborative, and competitive work
• focus on:
• designing and evaluating new tech to suport work process
• study social exchanges, learning, games, entertainment
  
• groupware
  
• current trends lead to the suggestion that most computer-based tasks will become collaborative, just as most work environments have social aspects
• collaboration: motivating force for using computer -> direct collaboration (direct manipulation of display elements is part of larger goal)
• 10.2 Goals of Collaboration
• people collaborate 'cuz doing is so satisfying or productive
• collaboration can have purely emotionally rewarding or specific task-related goals
• analyzing:
• focused partnerships are collaborations between 2-3 people who need each other to complete a task
• lecture or demo formats have 1 person sharing info with many users
• conferences: many-to-many msg
• meeting and decision support can be done in a face-to-face meeting, with each user working at a computer and making simulaneous contributions.
  shared window + private window + large-screen projectors -> enable simultanrous shared comments that may be anonymous
• ...
  
• the potential market for innovative software tools is large, but challenging 'cuz of numerous and subtle questions
• reserach in collaborative interfaces is often more complicated than in single-user interface
• researchers must invent their own methodologies
• collaboration also facilitates awareness of a partner's gaze and body languange and enhances trust-building eye contact
• 10.5 Face-to-face Interfaces: Same Place, Same Time
• work together in the same room: use complex shared technology
• 10.5.1 electornic meeting room. control rooms, public spaces
  
• computer presentation:
  
• reduce eye contact
• turn a lively dialog into a boring monologue in a dark room
• challenges
• understand the role of technology in support info transfer
  
• recognize the appropriate role of shared contol
  
• benefits:
• ...
• group memory enables users to pause, reflect on info, and serve as a oermanent record of what occrred
• several existing shared workspace:
• Capture Lab, LiveBoard, Mimio, SMART Board, etc.
  
• interaction in public spaces with wall displays may be through personal computers, mobile devises, or special input devices.
• pros: everyone sees the same display, can work communally to produce a joint and recorded result
• cons: coordination may be complex, technology distraction, nice ideas are hard to deliver
  
• the casual nature of display:
• facilitates info sharing
• promotes awareness of what others are doing
  

• questions for consideration (p446 box10.1)
  

[UI] Ch6 Direct Manipulation and Virtual Environment

(Designing the User Interface, Ben Shneiderman and Catherine Plaisant, Addison-Wesley, 2004, ISBN 0-321-19786-0)

• 6.4 3D Interfaces
• "enhanced" interface may be better than 3D reality: enable superhuman capabilities
• make the interface better than reality
• questionable application: those which simple 2D representations would do the job
• successful application: game environment, 'cuz increasingly rich social contexts based on spatial cognition
• provide 3D desktops and workspaces, sometimes based on office and room metaphors, but not yet spawned successful products.
• modest use of 3D techniques: add highlights to 2D interfaces, e.g. button
  -> improve use of spatial memory
  -> but also distracting (visual complexity)
  
• check list for effective 3D interface:
• ...
• keep text readable
  
• simplify user&object movement
• enable users to construct visual groups to support spatial recall
  
• guidelines for inclusion of enhanced 3D features:
• provide overview so users can see the big picture
• provide history keeping
• enable remote collaboration
• ...
  
• Enhanced 3D interfaces could be the key to making some kinds of 3D teleconferencing, collaboration, and teleoperation popular.
  

[UI] Ch1 Usability of Interactive Systems

(Designing the User Interface, Ben Shneiderman and Catherine Plaisant, Addison-Wesley, 2004, ISBN 0-321-19786-0)

• 1.1 Introduction
• HCI (human-computer interaction) began by combining the data-gathering methods and intellectual framework of experimental psychology with the powerful and widely used tools deveoped from computer science.
• UI changes many people's life
• the motor, perceptual, and cognitive foundations are growing firmer, while the social, economic, and ethical impacts are becoming clearer.
• some designers promote:
  
• persuasive technologies that change users' behavior
• multi-model or gestural interfaces that facilitate use
• affective interfaces that respond to the user's emotional state
  
• 1.2 Usability Requirements
• making a checklist of subjective guidelines: have thorough understanding of the diverse commmunity of users and the tasks that must be accomplished
• when an interactive system is well designed, the interface almost disappears, enabling users to concentrate on their work, exploration, or pleasure.
• goals:
• ascertain the users' needs
• what tasks and subtasks must be carried out
• frequent / occasional / exceptional / repair tasks
  
• ensure proper reliability
• user's trust of systems is fragile
  
• promote appropriate:
  
• standardization - common UI features across multiple app
  
• integration - file formats
  
• consistency - common action sequence...
  
• portability - potential to convert data and share UI across multiple SW and HW environments
  
• complete projects on schedule and within budget
  
• 1.3 Usability Measures
• practical evaluation
• time to learn
• speed of performance
• rate of errors by users
• retention over time
• subjective satisfaction
  
• after multiple design alternatives have been raised, the leading possibilities should be reviewed by designers and users.
• high-fidelity online prototypes create a more realistice environment for expert reviews and usability testing
  
• 1.4 Usability Motivations
• the enormous interest in interface usability arises from:
  
• the growing recognition of how poorly designed many current interfaces are
• the benefits elegant interfaces bring to users
  
• exploratory, creative, and collaborative interfaces:
• users may be knowledgeable in the task domain, but novinces in the underlying computer concepts
• their motivation is high, but so are their expectations
  
• at best, having computer vanish as users become completely when the computer absorbed in their task domains.
• provide direct manipulation representation of the world of action
• then tasks are carried out by rapid familiar selections or gestures, with immediate feedback and new sets of choices
• users can keep their focus on the task, with minimal distraction in operating the interface
  

weekly report (6/26-7/2)

• 6/26 group discussion
• 6/28-7/2 reading the book: designing the user interface => notes Ch 1, 6, 10, 2
  

weekly report (6/19-6/25)

• 6/19 nightmarket workshop arrangement
  
• 6/23 ubicomp meeting
• introducing project
  
• discuss with James, 大寶 et al.
  
• group discussion - revise
  
• 6/24 related work reading
• 6/25 related work reading

weekly report (6/12-6/18)

• 6/12 discussion
• 6/13 meeting - scenario, goal, paper work distribution
• 6/14 paper 1st draft, meeting, revise
  
• 6/15
  
• paper revise by Hao
• nightmarket preparation, staffs meeting @venue
  
• Experiencing RaoHe nightmarket:
  Jackie, Vincent, Jurgen, Jurgen's wife, Fanny, Sean, Peggy
• 6/16 Nightmarket workshop day 1
• submit to ubicomp2006 as poster
• talks
• group discussion, brainstorming, divid groups (with Denny and Jay)
• 6/17 Nightmarket workshop day 2
  
• talk
• group discussion, implementation, poster
• back to lab to continue implementing until next morning
  
• 6/18 Nightmarket workshop day 3
  
• demo and feedbacks
• project webpage here
  

weekly report (6/9-6/11)

• 6/9 discussion (all)
  • scenario - sharing in meeting room; everyone has portable computer
  • goal - few infrastructure
  • mechanism... (not comes out yet)
• 6/10 discussion (all)
  • mechanism... (not comes out yet: practicability?)
• 6/11 (peggy)
  • ubicomp poster paper draft - introduction part