Simplified Facial Animation Control Utilizing Novel Input Devices: A Comparative Study

My comments on other blogs:


Authors:
Nikolaus Bee - University of Augsburg
Bernhard Falk - University of Augsburg
Elisabeth André - University of Augsburg

Summary:
This paper explores three different input sources for the manipulation of facial animations on three dimensional objects.  This research uses a library called FACS (Facial Action Coding System) to encode parts of a 3D model to allow easy animations to be implemented and changed.

Many computer games that allow the manipulation of facial features use slider bars which makes it easy because the programmer can just slap some slider onto a range of values.  The research group came up with the idea of using a game pad and a data glove as possible input sources to change values associated with the 3D model.

Early on in the study the research group asked two professional graphic artists from a well-known video game company to review their idea of using these two inputs in place of the common sliders.  Both experts agreed that the game pad seemed a more natural way of input while the data glove was not a very good source of input.

Along with this data the research group implemented a user study to test this theory on 17 non-professional participants.  Most users stated that they "felt" more comfortable with the sliders, however the data showed that the users actually performed faster with the game pad.  Much like the experts suggested, the data glove was not a good source of input and not well liked.

Discussion:
I chose to read this paper because it looked interesting because I am interested in the video game development process and facial animation ties in with that field.  After reading the paper, I realized this was based on the input processes for the manipulation of the facial animation.  I found it strange that the researchers chose to test the data glove even after the experts said it was a bad idea, and what do you know? People hated the data glove.  Overall the paper was quite boring and did not state much other than the fact that the game pad was a better source of input than both traditional sliders and a data glove.  I did not feel like this paper was "published journal" worthy material.

Hand Gesture Recognition and Virtual Game Control Based on 3D Accelerometer and EMG Sensors

My comments on other blogs:


Authors:
Xu Zhang - University of Science & Technology of China
Xiang Chen - University of Science & Technology of China
Wen-hui Wang - University of Science & Technology of China
Ji-hai Yang - University of Science & Technology of China
Vuokko Lantz - Nokia Research Center
Kong-qiao Wang - Nokia Research Center

Summary:
Accelerometers have been used as devices to accurately measure large movements but lack the precision needed to detect finger movement.  Electromyogram sensors have also been used to detect small subtle movements but cannot accurately measure large scale movements.

This paper introduces a hand based gesture device that combines both accelerometers (ACC) with electromyogram (EMG) sensors with the help of Hidden Markov Models (HMM) to increase accuracy.

A user study was done to test the effectiveness of ACC devices alone, EMG devices alone, and the combination of ACC+EMG devices.  From this study it showed that:

• ACC devices are only accurate 85.5-90.7% of the time
• EMG devices are only accurate 65.9-80.3% of the time
• ACC+EMG devices are accurate almost 100% of the time

The user study implemented a rubik's cube game that used this ACC+EMG device as input.

The participants were given a randomly mixed rubik's cube and asked to solve it with the device.  The user's were also given some common strategies to solve the rubik's cube quickly.

Discussion:
I thought this paper was definitely interesting although a little too much technical jargon was thrown that was pretty confusing.  Also, a lot of mathematical formulas were added and I was not able to fully understand what symbol's meant what.  From the pictures and data, it seems that this is a very plausible implementation of technology and is worth using in future research.  I think to fully trust the "almost 100% accuracy" reading I would have to test it myself.

Emotional Design

Author:

Don Norman

Summary:
This is yet another book by Don Norman.  This book is a response to his previous book The Design of Everyday Things.  Norman had gotten many complaints that if the world designed objects in the way he had first described then everything would work but would be ugly.  In this book he argues that he did not mean to discount the "emotional" side of design but to only bring attention the important fact that the product needs to actually work in order to be any good.

He goes through many scenarios much like in The Design of Everyday Things where he shows items that work well and that look good too.  One of the most prevalent images from his books are his obsession with teapots.  In the first book he showed the "masochist's teapot", a teapot where if you were to use it, you would surely scald yourself with boiling water.  He showed that this was badly designed for functional reasons.

In this book he tackles a different side of design, the aesthetics.  While he still states that functionality is important, it is equally important to have an emotional connection to the objects you own.  In fact, many of the objects that we hold most dear have no functional value at all (e.g. photographs of loved ones.)

He presents more teapots in this book, but now presents them in a different light.

He shows that he owns a "Coffeepot for Masochists", not for the functional value, but that every time he looks at it, it makes him smile.

He also owns a teapot designed by Michael Grave.  This teapot he states is beautiful, it works decently well and he uses it sometimes just for the sake that it is beautiful, not because the tea is better than another pot.  This is his example of a practical yet aesthetically pleasing object.

His third teapot is a Ronnefeldt "tilting" teapot.  This teapot is very unique as it is designed with each stage of the tea making process in mind.  This teapot is primarily functional, but he does not use it often because it is more work than he is willing to do for good tea.  It makes great tea, in fact, but just because it functional this does not mean it is the best choice for him.

While he enjoys all of his teapots, he actually rarely uses any of these three and they mainly serve as conversation starters.  Functional? No. Aesthetically pleasing? Yes.  Emotional connection? Definitely yes.

His point is that the emotional side of design is just as important as the functional side because we buy things for other reasons than to use on a daily basis.  This is the recurring theme throughout the book and is the main message he is trying to get across to the reader.  Although there are many other examples that he shares, this theme pretty much sums up the entire book.

Discussion:
I really do like Don Norman's writing.  A lot of it I can relate to and it makes the book that much more enjoyable.  I thought that this book was not quite as good as his first book but definitely a good addition to it.  I really have no bad comments and not really any good comments to share either.

IUI'09 Workshop Summary: Sketch Recognition

My comments on other blogs:


Author:
Tracy Anne Hammond

Summary:
This paper describes the IUI 2009 Sketch Recognition Workshop.  It explains that sketch recognition is automated understanding of some drawn diagram, picture, or stroke.  This area is important because it ties in the natural input of pen-like utensils to the world of computers through the use of multi-touch input devices. 

Natural input is key because the more intuitive the input to a device is, the easier it is to understand.  It allows for ideas that are easily drawn to be quickly and accurately represented by computer generated images.  Sketch recognition has been proven to increase learning by directly giving feedback as input is received.

Sketch recognition also has many areas of application such as with CAD (Computer Aided Design) software which is used in a variety of fields.  Most of the users of this software are known to first draw their diagrams and sketches on actual paper before they attempt to convert that image into the computerized version.  Sketch recognition allows for this image to be analyzed and directly converted into the computerized version without the need to manually translate each part.

Discussion:
This paper was short and informative.  I chose to read this paper solely because Dr. Hammond was the author.  Although this paper is not technically a "research paper," it is important to realize what types of workshops are offered at different conferences as well as some of the details pertaining to what the workshop entails.

TrailBlazer: Enabling Blind Users to Blaze Trails Through the Web

My comments on other blogs:



Authors:
Jeffrey P. Bigham - University of Washington
Tessa Lau - IBM Almaden Research Center
Jeffrey Nichols - IBM Almaden Research Center

Summary:
This paper introduces a problem concerning how blind computer users use the web.  Although there already exists screen readers to help a blind person navigate a web page, this process is time consuming and takes substantially longer than it would for a person with the ability to see.

Sometimes web developers provide annotations and other meta data to a page that can be interpreted by screen readers to help navigate these pages.  However, the actually implementation of this is costly to the software developer and is often left out of most web pages.  Also, the structuring of websites is not strict so a simple algorithm to extract key data cannot be implemented to work for every web page.

TrailBlazer provides scripts that can be written for pages that help to annotate types of pages.  The example given in the paper is an airline web page.  The goal is to generalize these scripts as much as possible so that they can be applied in various situations.  For instance, if you have a script for airline website A but not for airline website B, TrailBlazer can apply the script to airline website B as well.  If the script cannot be easily applied, it attempts to create a script to help guide the blind user through the web page.

TrailBlazer can also be used to intelligently search for more information.  It has been proven to get the top result of a web search in a list of the "top 5 possible websites matching your query" 75.9% of the time.  The accuracy is crucial because even with help of the navigational script of TrailBlazer, it still takes a blind user more time to navigate a page than it would if they could simply glance at the content.

Discussion:
This paper didn't convince me that this is the "best new thing" for blind users and that is disappointing.  While I do not know that much about screen readers or how blind people navigate the web, this still does not seem like a solid system for navigating pages.  It still requires the user to memorize a large amount of keyboard commands that may or may not be along with the standard commands.  While I believe that it is good that research is being done to help those that have this extra difficulty, TrailBlazer did not seem to be a 100% viable solution to the problem and only added an additional strain to the blind user.

The Design and Evaluation of Multi-Finger Mouse Emulation Techniques

 My comments on other blogs:



Authors:
Justin Matejka - Autodesk Research
Tovi Grossman -Autodesk Research
Jessica Lo - Autodesk Research
George Fitzmaurice - Autodesk Research

Summary:
With the increased use of multi-touch tables and screens, it is common for users to want the precision of the mouse from standard computer systems.  The goal of this paper is to find the best technique to for emulating the mouse on large multi-touch devices.  Autodesk Research explores many different avenues for mouse emulation and measures the effectiveness of each.

The study first focuses on the types of mapping for the mouse cursor (direct, offset, scaled absolute, and relative) and on the tracking style used (one finger tracking or two finger tracking.)  It was shown that the offset technique performed the best overall for both large and small targets.

The study then focuses on way to define button distinction.  Some of the styles that they chose to test and implement to specify left, right, and middle mouse buttons are:

• Chording Technique - a single tracking finger with each additional finger representing left, middle, and right buttons as the number of fingers increase.
• Side Technique - tracking is done by the index and ring finger.  The thumb activates the left button, the pinky activates the right button, and the middle finger activates the middle button.
• Distance Technique - a single tracking finger where the relative distances from the tracking finger represent left, middle, and right button trigger points.
• Gesture Technique - a single tracking finger where a thumb tap is the left button, and thumb swipe to the right activates the right button and thumb swipe downward activates the middle button.
• Side+Chording Technique - a single tracking finger where side and chording are combined where the thumb activates the left button, the middle finger activates the right button and the combination of thumb and middle finger activate the middle button.
• Side+Distance Technique - single tracking finger where the left button is activated by the thumb, the middle button is the middle finger and the right button is the index finger.
• Chording+Distance Technique - a single tracking finger that is similar to Side+Chording tracking but where distance determines the button press instead of which side the press occurs on.

From all of these techniques the study found that the Side+Distance Technique is far superior and easier to use out of all of the emulation techniques.  The SDMouse (Side+Distance Mouse) performed equal with physical mouse use.

The study then briefly explores button activation technique (momentary pressing vs. toggle button activation.)  It was found that momentary press is much faster and is the most like the way a physical mouse is used.


Discussion:
I chose to read this paper (a very long and detailed technical paper) because I am very interested in multi-touch table technology and this confronts the input issues head on.  I have read other papers trying to solve this same issue and I believe this one satisfies the need the best.  While I do think the information is very useful, from all of the pictures, videos, and pretending to try it out myself, I find it very uncomfortable to not have something in my hand.  My hand gets cramped easily and it feels more awkward than if I was simply holding something.  They did not address this issue in the paper, but I believe that would be useful future work for these researchers.

"Pimp My Roomba": Designing for Personalization

My comments on other blogs:



Authors:
JaYoung Sung - Georgia Institute of Technology
Rebecca E. Grinter - Georgia Institute of Technology
Henrik I. Christensen -  Georgia Institute of Technology

Summary:

In this paper the idea of personalization to promote the use of a product is explored by giving a number of participants Roomba vacuum cleaning robots along with customization kits.  The participants are encouraged to add custom skins, stickers, paint, and write on their robots in any way they see fit.  The study lasted six months and at the end of the six months the users were asked about their experiences with their Roomba.

Of the people that regularly used their Roomba a varying degree of customization was done.  About half of the users decided not to customize their Roomba because they did not want to feel attached to it and wanted it to just do its job and then be tucked away in the corner.  Overall they felt that customizing it was unnecessary for it to accomplish its task.

The other half of the users that regularly used their Roomba did personalize it to varying degrees.  Some of these users chose to go online and order pre-made "skins" to add to their robot because they felt that it was easier than placing stickers or drawing on it.  Another reason a skin was chosen was the fact that the participants wanted the Roomba to match their furniture.  They wanted the Roomba to blend in with the environment and be an "unnoticed helper."

The set of users who chose to personalize their robot with paints and stickers shared a common feeling that the Roomba was a part of their family.  They chose to take extra care of it and believed that the Roomba actually performed better once they gave it their own personal feel.  The customization of the robot reflected its perceived personality and the participants were more likely to show off their new "friend."

The people that chose not to use the Roomba either forgot that they had it or did not like it when it was in use.

Discussion:
I really enjoyed this paper for the fact that it was not so much focusing on the area of  "robotic vacuum cleaners" but instead on the idea of personalization for promoting use of a product.  I have personalized some of my own items for the same reasons as shown above and can relate to every side of the study.  For instance, I personalize my computer and my car and I feel a closer connection to them and interact with them more as beings rather than just "things".

I believe that if a product promotes itself to be personalizable, it easily affords itself to be used and loved by its owner.