Interacting with communication appliances: an evaluation of two computer vision-based selection techniques

ABSTRACT

Communication appliances, intended for home settings, require intuitive forms of interaction. Computer vision offers a potential solution, but is not yet sufficiently accurate.As interaction designers, we need to know more than the absolute accuracy of such techniques: we must also be able to compare how they will work in our design settings, especially if we allow users to collaborate in the interpretation of their actions. We conducted a 2x4 within-subjects experiment to compare two interaction techniques based on computer vision: motion sensing, with EyeToy®-like feedback, and object tracking. Both techniques were 100% accurate with 2 or 5 choices. With 21 choices, object-tracking had significantly fewer errors and took less time for an accurate selection. Participants' subjective preferences were divided equally between the two techniques. This study compares these techniques as they would be used in real-world applications, with integrated user feedback, allowing interface designers to choose the one that best suits the specific user requirements for their particular application.

REFERENCES

• 1: G. Bradski. Computer vision face tracking for use in a perceptual user interface. Intel Tech. J., Q2, 1998.
• 2: William T. Freeman , Paul A. Beardsley , Hiroshi Kage , Ken-Ichi Tanaka , Kazuo Kyuma , Craig D. Weissman, Computer vision for computer interaction, ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, v.33 n.4, p.65-68, Nov.2000 [doi>10.1145/345370.345417]
• 3: C. Heath and P. Luff. Collaboration and control: Crisis management and multimedia technology in london underground line control rooms. J. CSCW, 1(1):24--48, 1992.
• 4: Hilary Hutchinson , Wendy Mackay , Bo Westerlund , Benjamin B. Bederson , Allison Druin , Catherine Plaisant , Michel Beaudouin-Lafon , Stéphane Conversy , Helen Evans , Heiko Hansen , Nicolas Roussel , Björn Eiderbäck, Technology probes: inspiring design for and with families, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, April 05-10, 2003, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA [doi>10.1145/642611.642616]
• 5: M. Krueger. Artificial Reality 2. Addison-Wesley, 1991.
• 6: Wendy E. Mackay, The interactive thread: exploring methods for multi-disciplinary design, Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Designing interactive systems: processes, practices, methods, and techniques, August 01-04, 2004, Cambridge, MA, USA [doi>10.1145/1013115.1013131]
• 7: Bruno Von Niman , Do Van Thanh , Jo Herstad , Helge Hüttenrauch, Transparent communication appliances, Proceedings of the HCI International '99 (the 8th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction) on Human-Computer Interaction: Communication, Cooperation, and Application Design-Volume 2, p.18-22, August 22-26, 1999
• 8: N. Roussel, H. Evans, and H. H. Mirrorspace: using proximity as an interface to video-mediated communication. INRIA Technical report, 2004.
• 9: Joan Truckenbrod, Touchware, ACM SIGGRAPH 98 Electronic art and animation catalog, p.2, July 19-24, 1998, Orlando, Florida, United States [doi>10.1145/281388.281395]
• 10: Z.Zivkovic. Optical-flow-driven gadgets for gaming user interface. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Entertainment Computing, 2004.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  D. Software
  D.2 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING
      D.2.2 Design Tools and Techniques

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES
      H.1.2 User/Machine Systems
  H.5 INFORMATION INTERFACES AND PRESENTATION (I.7)
      H.5.3 Group and Organization Interfaces

Keywords:
EyeToy, MirrorSpace, communication appliance, computer vision-based selection techniques, domestic technologies, home settings, motion sensing, object tracking