steerable interfaces for interactive environments

Steerable Interfaces for Interactive

EnvironmentsStanislaw Borkowski

thesis director: James L. CrowleyJury:

Institut National de Recherche en Informatique et Automatique

INRIA Rhône-AlpesJune 26, 2006

Andreas Butz (UM), Joëlle Coutaz (UJF), Alex Pentland (MIT), Pierre Wellner (IDIAP)

2

User Interface (UI): aggregate of physical entities or information bound to these entities

What is a user interface?

A

3

Steerable UI:can be relocated in spaceposition is mediated by

the computer system

Portable UI:can be relocatedposition is directly

controlled through physical contact

Mobile UI’s

Mobile UIs

Portable UIs

Steerable UIs

A

4

Mobility in current IT Steerable interfaces

Conventional GUI (steerable output) X11 session teleporting [Richardson93]

Portable interfaces Wearable computers Cell phones Personal Digital Assistants Laptops ….

5

Mobility in ambient computing Multiple displays embedded in

the environment Large size displays Mobile interaction resources,

both portable and steerable

[Pinhanez01] [Streitz99]

[Arias00]

6

Why steerable?

Flexibility in resources usage

New forms of Human-computer interaction

New forms of Human-Human interaction

7

Current situation – summary

Problem: Need for steerable UIs No predictive models

Solution: Provide enabling technology Explore interaction techniques Evaluate the value of steerable UIs

8

Outline Mobility in IT Steerable UIs Mobile projected UI Mobile UIs for collaborative work Conclusions

9

State of the art

EasyLiving [Brumitt00]

Tic-Tac-Toe [Pinhanez05]

10

State of the art – limitations

UI is observable at standstill Limited spatial controllability Only predefined locations Planar surfaces only

Requirements for steerable UIs: Continuous observability and

controllability

11

Outline Mobility in IT Steerable UIs Mobile projected UI

Prototype implementation[in collaboration with J. Letessier]

Evaluation – latency estimation

Mobile UIs for collaborative work Conclusions

12

The Steerable Camera Projector

(2002)

Other steerable projection systems: The Everywhere Display (IBM 2000)

Fluid Beam (Fluidum consortium 2002)

SCP from Karlsruhe (UKA 2004)

13

Steerable display (2002)

14

User-centric approach

End-users: Latency limits < 50ms Easy setup, no maintenance Reliability / predictability

Developers: Abstraction: be relevant Isolation: allow integration Contract: offer quality of service

15

Pragmatic approach

Black-box servicesBIP (Basic Interconnection Protocol)

BIP implementation ≈ SOA middleware

service/service and service/application communication

service discovery (standards-based)

16

Interactive system

ApplicationSCP

software

Human and Environmen

t

Interaction events

Display orders

17

Interactive system

Application


tSCPdisplay

SCPcontroller

Frame grabber

Interaction detector

SCPcalibrator

A

18

Interactive system

Application


tSCPdisplay

SCPcontroller

Frame grabber


SCPcalibrator

19

Video projector

Light source

Screen

Source image

Projection on arbitrary oriented planar surfaces

User’s perception

20

Video projector

Screen


Light source

Image to project

User’s perception

Source image

SCPdisplay

21


Image to project

User’s view

22

Interactive system

Application


tSCPdisplay

SCPcontroller

Frame grabber


SCPcalibrator

23

Sensor-centric environment model

1 2

3

123

24

Display surface detection

Screen

25

The Portable Display Surface

26

Interactive system

Application


tSCPdisplay

SCPcontroller

Frame grabber


SCPcalibrator

27

Interactive widgets projected on a portable display surface

28

Luminance-based button widget

29

Locate widget in the camera image

Estimate occlusion

Update widget state

Touch detection

CIH

)()(:)( tLtLtL io

30

Robustness to clutter

31

Assembling occlusion detectors

32

Striplet – the occlusion detector

x

y

0 R

33

Striplet-based SPOD

SPOD – Simple-Pattern Occlusion Detector

34

Striplet-based button

35

SPOD-based calculator

Accelerated video

36

Outline Mobility in IT Steerable UIs Mobile projected UI

Prototype implementationEvaluation – latency estimation

Mobile UIs for collaborative work Conclusions

37

Latency estimation

0t

pt 0t

PCI A/D converter

Frame Grabber

CPU

Imalab shell

Image processing

Graphic Card

OpenGl render

0ttl p

38

Latency estimation

Fan

PCI A/D converter

Frame Grabber

CPU

Imalab shell

Image processing

Graphic Card

OpenGl renderRegulated power

supply

Video sequence capture

Plastic bar

Projection of the bar

39

Latency estimation – results

+ up to 51ms!!!

A~17ms

0tPCI A/D converter

Frame Grabber

CPU

Imalab shell

Image processing

Graphic Card

OpenGl render

~70ms

0tPCI A/D converterFrame Grabber

CPU

Imalab shell

Graphic Card~32ms

40

Interactive system

Application


tSCPdisplay

SCPcontroller

Frame grabber


SCPcalibrator

41

Outline

Mobility in IT Steerable UIs Mobile projected UIs Mobile UIs for collaborative work

ContAct applicationUser study – comparison of different

take-over techniques

Conclusions

42

ContAct – a system for authoring presentations

Collaboration through interface mobility

43

ContAct application setup Wide angle camera Tabletop camera Steerable Camera Projector Portable Display Surface

44

ContAct application GUI

45

Outline Mobility in IT Steerable interface prototype Mobile UIs for collaborative work

ContAct applicationTaking control: a comparative user study

[in collaboration with J. Maisonnasse and J. Letessier]

Conclusions

46

Evaluation of techniques for taking control

Objectives: Determine the preferred

control taking technique Evaluate the impact on the

task completion performance Evaluate user acceptance of

steerable interfaces

47

Experimental setup

GUI

Users

Hardware:

Steerable Camera Projector

Microphone headsets

Portable Display Surface

Software:

Speech detector [D. Vaufreydaz]

Conversation modeling [J. Maisonnaisse]

Finger tracking [J. Letessier]

PDS tracking

Drawing application

48

The User Interface

49

The task

Collaborative reconstruction of a graph

50

The task

Collaborative reconstruction of a graph

User 2 User 3User 1

51

Experimental conditions

Proposed techniques for taking control: Baseline: fixed interface Portable: PDS Steerable: touch-based Steerable: voice-based steering

52

Fixed interface

GUI

Users

53

Explicit direct manipulation

54

Explicit touch-based steering

55

Implicit voice-based steering

Rules controlling the interface location: Interface is steered toward

the “main speaker” Interruptions are ignored Drawing inhibits vocal steering Conflicts result in loss of interface control

56

Subjects

12 groups of 3 people 13 women, 23 men Average age 27.7 19 experts in IT 17 subjects familiar with IT

57

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

fixed button pds voice

experts non-experts

Results – user preference

rank

Rank scale: 1 = most liked 4 = least liked

58

Results – PDS

Fun to use Predictable

Less intuitive Less reactive Not well suited

for the task

Experts Non-experts

59

Results – Voice-based control

Intimidating Limits

collaboration

Fun to use Enhances

collaboration

Experts Non-expertsModified their behaviour

Least predictable

60

Example result

61

User performance – ability to duplicate

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


experts non-experts

% of remembered elements

62

Outline Mobility in IT Steerable UIs Mobile projected UI Mobile UIs for collaborative work Conclusions

63

Conclusions 1/2

Steerable camera-projector pair enables mobile UIs

Portable UIs (PDS)

Steerable UIs

64

Conclusions 2/2

UI mobility can enhance the collaborative experience

Explicit control is preferred over implicit control

65

Future directions 1/2

The SCP: Adapting to display surface texture

The PDS: Tracking and interaction with multiple PDS’ High frame-rate tracking

Vision-based projected widgets: Integration of multiple occlusion detectors

66

Steerable interfaces: Other applications for steerable interfaces Alternative methods for controlling the

location Exploring links with plastic interfaces –

dynamic interface adaptation Creation of a “space manager”

Future directions 2/2

67

Thank you for your attention

69

ResultsThe preference:#1 the PDS #2 button-based control #3 voice-based control#4 fixed interface

2

3

4


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1 2 3 4

70

1 2

3

Sensor-centric environment model

71

SPOD software components

Frame Grabber

Client Application

Calibration

GUI rendering

GUI

Striplets Engine

VEILS

P

O

D

72

Striplet – the occlusion detector

dxdytyxyx t ),,L(),(f)(R gain

Gain

x

x

y

0),(fgain dxdyyx

73

VEIL – Vision Events Interpretation Layer

Striplets Engine

VEILS

P

O

D

Inputs Widgets coordinates Scale and UI to camera mapping matrix Striplets occlusion events

Outputs Interaction events Striplets coordinates

74


Striplets Engine

VEILS

P

O

D



75


Striplets Engine

VEILS

P

O

D



76

Inputs Striplets UI-coordinates UI to camera mapping matrix Images from camera service

Outputs Occlusion events

Striplets Engine Service

Striplets Engine

VEILS

P

O

D

77




Striplets Engine

VEILS

P

O

D

78




Striplets Engine

VEILS

P

O

D

79


Striplets Engine

VEILS

P

O

D



80

Striplet-based slider

81

Tracking the PDS

Tracking edges in the Hough space

+ Naturally robust to partial occlusions

- High computation cost

Line-segments-based tracking

+ Efficient quadrilateral detection

- Difficulties in handling occlusions

82

Pushing vs. pulling the UI

83

Results

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1 2 3 4

Time performance:

Trial number

Normalized trial time

sipi XHX

84

Performance• +- 180 deg of pan

• 1600 discrete positions (resolution)• 90 deg/s max pan speed reached in 0.75 s

• 90 deg of tilt• 500 discrete positions• 80 deg/s max tilt speed reached in 0.60s

Video Projector

Camera

Pan Stepper-motor

Tilt Stepper-motor

Control and power supply

steerable interfaces for interactive environments

Documents