-
Watch Less and Uncover More: Could Navigation Tools Help Users Search and Explore Videos?
Authors:
Maria Perez-Ortiz,
Sahan Bulathwela,
Claire Dormann,
Meghana Verma,
Stefan Kreitmayer,
Richard Noss,
John Shawe-Taylor,
Yvonne Rogers,
Emine Yilmaz
Abstract:
Prior research has shown how 'content preview tools' improve speed and accuracy of user relevance judgements across different information retrieval tasks. This paper describes a novel user interface tool, the Content Flow Bar, designed to allow users to quickly identify relevant fragments within informational videos to facilitate browsing, through a cognitively augmented form of navigation. It ach…
▽ More
Prior research has shown how 'content preview tools' improve speed and accuracy of user relevance judgements across different information retrieval tasks. This paper describes a novel user interface tool, the Content Flow Bar, designed to allow users to quickly identify relevant fragments within informational videos to facilitate browsing, through a cognitively augmented form of navigation. It achieves this by providing semantic "snippets" that enable the user to rapidly scan through video content. The tool provides visually-appealing pop-ups that appear in a time series bar at the bottom of each video, allowing to see in advance and at a glance how topics evolve in the content. We conducted a user study to evaluate how the tool changes the users search experience in video retrieval, as well as how it supports exploration and information seeking. The user questionnaire revealed that participants found the Content Flow Bar helpful and enjoyable for finding relevant information in videos. The interaction logs of the user study, where participants interacted with the tool for completing two informational tasks, showed that it holds promise for enhancing discoverability of content both across and within videos. This discovered potential could leverage a new generation of navigation tools in search and information retrieval.
△ Less
Submitted 10 January, 2022;
originally announced January 2022.
-
MotionInput v2.0 supporting DirectX: A modular library of open-source gesture-based machine learning and computer vision methods for interacting and controlling existing software with a webcam
Authors:
Ashild Kummen,
Guanlin Li,
Ali Hassan,
Teodora Ganeva,
Qianying Lu,
Robert Shaw,
Chenuka Ratwatte,
Yang Zou,
Lu Han,
Emil Almazov,
Sheena Visram,
Andrew Taylor,
Neil J Sebire,
Lee Stott,
Yvonne Rogers,
Graham Roberts,
Dean Mohamedally
Abstract:
Touchless computer interaction has become an important consideration during the COVID-19 pandemic period. Despite progress in machine learning and computer vision that allows for advanced gesture recognition, an integrated collection of such open-source methods and a user-customisable approach to utilising them in a low-cost solution for touchless interaction in existing software is still missing.…
▽ More
Touchless computer interaction has become an important consideration during the COVID-19 pandemic period. Despite progress in machine learning and computer vision that allows for advanced gesture recognition, an integrated collection of such open-source methods and a user-customisable approach to utilising them in a low-cost solution for touchless interaction in existing software is still missing. In this paper, we introduce the MotionInput v2.0 application. This application utilises published open-source libraries and additional gesture definitions developed to take the video stream from a standard RGB webcam as input. It then maps human motion gestures to input operations for existing applications and games. The user can choose their own preferred way of interacting from a series of motion types, including single and bi-modal hand gesturing, full-body repetitive or extremities-based exercises, head and facial movements, eye tracking, and combinations of the above. We also introduce a series of bespoke gesture recognition classifications as DirectInput triggers, including gestures for idle states, auto calibration, depth capture from a 2D RGB webcam stream and tracking of facial motions such as mouth motions, winking, and head direction with rotation. Three use case areas assisted the development of the modules: creativity software, office and clinical software, and gaming software. A collection of open-source libraries has been integrated and provide a layer of modular gesture map** on top of existing mouse and keyboard controls in Windows via DirectX. With ease of access to webcams integrated into most laptops and desktop computers, touchless computing becomes more available with MotionInput v2.0, in a federated and locally processed method.
△ Less
Submitted 10 August, 2021;
originally announced August 2021.
-
Creepy Technology: What Is It and How Do You Measure It?
Authors:
Paweł W. Woźniak,
Jakob Karolus,
Florian Lang,
Caroline Eckherth,
Johannes Schöning,
Yvonne Rogers,
Jasmin Niess
Abstract:
Interactive technologies are getting closer to our bodies and permeate the infrastructure of our homes. While such technologies offer many benefits, they can also cause an initial feeling of unease in users. It is important for Human-Computer Interaction to manage first impressions and avoid designing technologies that appear creepy. To that end, we developed the Perceived Creepiness of Technology…
▽ More
Interactive technologies are getting closer to our bodies and permeate the infrastructure of our homes. While such technologies offer many benefits, they can also cause an initial feeling of unease in users. It is important for Human-Computer Interaction to manage first impressions and avoid designing technologies that appear creepy. To that end, we developed the Perceived Creepiness of Technology Scale (PCTS), which measures how creepy a technology appears to a user in an initial encounter with a new artefact. The scale was developed based on past work on creepiness and a set of ten focus groups conducted with users from diverse backgrounds. We followed a structured process of analytically develo** and validating the scale. The PCTS is designed to enable designers and researchers to quickly compare interactive technologies and ensure that they do not design technologies that produce initial feelings of creepiness in users.
△ Less
Submitted 15 February, 2021;
originally announced February 2021.
-
Building Proactive Voice Assistants: When and How (not) to Interact
Authors:
O. Miksik,
I. Munasinghe,
J. Asensio-Cubero,
S. Reddy Bethi,
S-T. Huang,
S. Zylfo,
X. Liu,
T. Nica,
A. Mitrocsak,
S. Mezza,
R. Beard,
R. Shi,
R. Ng,
P. Mediano,
Z. Fountas,
S-H. Lee,
J. Medvesek,
H. Zhuang,
Y. Rogers,
P. Swietojanski
Abstract:
Voice assistants have recently achieved remarkable commercial success. However, the current generation of these devices is typically capable of only reactive interactions. In other words, interactions have to be initiated by the user, which somewhat limits their usability and user experience. We propose, that the next generation of such devices should be able to proactively provide the right infor…
▽ More
Voice assistants have recently achieved remarkable commercial success. However, the current generation of these devices is typically capable of only reactive interactions. In other words, interactions have to be initiated by the user, which somewhat limits their usability and user experience. We propose, that the next generation of such devices should be able to proactively provide the right information in the right way at the right time, without being prompted by the user. However, achieving this is not straightforward, since there is the danger it could interrupt what the user is doing too much, resulting in it being distracting or even annoying. Furthermore, it could unwittingly, reveal sensitive/private information to third parties. In this report, we discuss the challenges of develo** proactively initiated interactions, and suggest a framework for when it is appropriate for the device to intervene. To validate our design assumptions, we describe firstly, how we built a functioning prototype and secondly, a user study that was conducted to assess users' reactions and reflections when in the presence of a proactive voice assistant. This pre-print summarises the state, ideas and progress towards a proactive device as of autumn 2018.
△ Less
Submitted 4 May, 2020;
originally announced May 2020.
-
Citation Counting, Citation Ranking, and h-Index of Human-Computer Interaction Researchers: A Comparison between Scopus and Web of Science
Authors:
Lokman I. Meho,
Yvonne Rogers
Abstract:
This study examines the differences between Scopus and Web of Science in the citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of 22 top human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers from EQUATOR--a large British Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration project. Results indicate that Scopus provides significantly more coverage of HCI literature than Web of Science, primarily due to coverage of rel…
▽ More
This study examines the differences between Scopus and Web of Science in the citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of 22 top human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers from EQUATOR--a large British Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration project. Results indicate that Scopus provides significantly more coverage of HCI literature than Web of Science, primarily due to coverage of relevant ACM and IEEE peer-reviewed conference proceedings. No significant differences exist between the two databases if citations in journals only are compared. Although broader coverage of the literature does not significantly alter the relative citation ranking of individual researchers, Scopus helps distinguish between the researchers in a more nuanced fashion than Web of Science in both citation counting and h-index. Scopus also generates significantly different maps of citation networks of individual scholars than those generated by Web of Science. The study also presents a comparison of h-index scores based on Google Scholar with those based on the union of Scopus and Web of Science. The study concludes that Scopus can be used as a sole data source for citation-based research and evaluation in HCI, especially if citations in conference proceedings are sought and that h scores should be manually calculated instead of relying on system calculations.
△ Less
Submitted 12 March, 2008;
originally announced March 2008.
