Zeiten:

  • Kick-off Meeting: 18.08.2014 14:00 - 15:30 Raum 2222
  • Präsentationen: 14:15 - 15:45, Raum 2222

Seminarraum

2222, Ahornstrasse 55
L2P Lernraum tbd

Milestones

Team
Topic
Supervisor
Literature Review
Report Outline
First Report
Slides
Camera-ready slides
Presentation
Final Report
Jan Kaßel,
Julia Abelen
Interactive data visualisation tools Krishna 28.8.4.9.25.9.9.10.16.10.23.10.6.11.
Lukas Breuer,
David Asselborn
Shape displays Simon 4.9.11.9.2.10.16.10.23.10.30.10.13.11.
Robin Rawiel,
Simon Kern
Tangibles on Multi-Touch Surfaces Simon 11.9.18.9.9.10.23.10.30.10.6.11.20.11.
Sebastian Vaaßen,
Emanuel Domnitsch
Wearable Computing Rene 18.9.25.9.16.10.30.10.6.11.13.11.27.11.
Linus Franke,
Nicolas Faber
Personal Fabrication Rene 25.9.2.10.23.10.6.11.13.11.20.11.4.12.
Patrick Halbach,
Björn Dählmann
Input Methodologies for Interactive Television Christian 2.10.9.10.30.10.13.11.20.11.27.11.11.12.
Prethep Paramananthan,
Moritz Dederichs
A survey of uninstrumented interaction
techniques for selecting objects in 3D
Chat 9.10.16.10.6.11.20.11.27.11.4.12.18.12.
Arne Pauly,
Marvin Bruna
Designing Second Screen
Applications for Interactive TV
Christian 23.10.30.10.20.11.4.12.11.12.18.12.5.1.
Marcus Langefeld
Lovis Suchmann
Near-surface input: technologies, user
studies, and application
Chat 27.11.4.12.5.1.8.1.15.1.22.1.5.2.
Christian Blischke
Fabian Haak
Visualizing Algorithms Jan-Peter 11.12.18.12.8.1.22.1.29.1.5.2.19.2.



Abgaben

Hier noch eine kurze Zusammenfassung was wir in den Abgaben erwarten.
Literature Review
Liste der Paper die ihr durchgearbeitet hat mit einer kurzen Zusammenfassung (ca. 30 Worte), eurer Wertung (Qualität des Papers) und eurer Einschätzung der Relevanz für euren Vortrag.

Report Outline
Stichpunktartige Zusammenfassung für eure Ausarbeitung. Welche Story wollt ihr erzählen? Wie wollt ihr das Thema einführen? Was sind eure Argumente? Mit welchen Papern wollt ihr eure Argumente unterstützen?

First Report
Die erste fertige Version der Ausarbeitung im CHI Format (10 Seiten) oder unserem Seminartemplate (30 Seiten Inhalt ohne Cover, Inhaltsverzeichnis, etc.). Wir erwarten hier, dass ihr etwas abgebt, das ihr für fertig haltet. Also: Keine Rechtschreibfehler mehr, zusammenhängende Argumentation, vollständige Literaturliste, alle erklärenden Bilder. Je besser diese Ausarbeitung ist, desto besser können wir euch dann Feedback geben. Wenn wir erst einmal jede Menge Rechtschreibfehler korrigieren müssen, bleiben die wichtigeren Kommentare über Argumentationsschwächen auf der Strecke.

Slides
Erste fertige Version eurer Präsentation (Powerpoint, Keynote, Prezi, ....). Auch hier, die gleiche Idee wie für die Ausarbeitung. Gebt eine für euch fertige Version ab, mit der ihr am nächsten Tag einen Vortrag halten könntet.

Camera-ready Slides
Die nächste Version der Präsentation, diesmal mit den mit uns besprochenen Änderungen. Auch dazu gibt es dann noch einmal Feedback.

Presentation (50% der Note)
Eure Präsentation vor der Gruppe. Wir erwarten hier eine gut geübte Präsentation. Bitte stellt auch vorher sicher, dass ihr wisst wie ihr das von euch gewählte Präsentationswerkzeug benutzt (Geh doch bitte mal zu Folie 12) und dass ihr auf Sätze wie "Oh, das kann man jetzt auf dem Beamer nicht mehr erkennen" verzichten könnt.

Final Report (50% der Note)
Eure endgültige Abgabe der Ausarbeitung. Da diese nach der Präsentation liegt, habt ihr noch einmal die Chance auf offen gebliebene Fragen zu antworten.


Themen:

Die Themen werden in den nächsten Tagen ergänzt. Bei allen Themen handelt es sich um aktuelle Publikationen aus dem Bereich der HCI. Ihre Ausarbeitung soll den aktuellen Stand der Forschung aus dem jeweiligen Bereich darstellen und diskutieren, welchen Beitrag die angegebene Publikation hierzu leistet.


Near-surface input: technologies, user studies, and application (IN ENGLISH) (Chat)

Recent proliferation in sensors tracking hand movements in midair opens new ground for interaction designs. In this topic, you will compile a collection of literature to show state of the art of near-surface input. The report should comprise a survey of hand, finger, and object detection technologies for or capable of near-surface interactions, user studies that pushes understanding of human behaviors for near-surface input, and applications of near-surface input both in the literature and on commercially-available systems.
  • Chat Wacharamanotham, Kashyap Todi, Marty Pye, and Jan Borchers. 2014. Understanding finger input above desktop devices. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1083-1092. DOI=10.1145/2556288.2557151 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2556288.2557151

Input Methodologies for Interactive Television (Christian)


Description: Television has changed from a lean back experience to a lean forward experience by bringing more interaction to the user. Typical examples are on-demand video services and second screen applications. In this proseminar topic, you will look at what different input methodologies beyond the classic remote control exist to support interactive TV experiences, and what are their pro's and con's.

  • Radu-Daniel Vatavu and Ionut-Alexandru Zaiti. 2014. Leap gestures for TV: insights from an elicitation study. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM international conference on Interactive experiences for TV and online video (TVX '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 131-138. DOI=10.1145/2602299.2602316 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2602299.2602316

Designing Second Screen Applications for Interactive TV (Christian)


Description: More and more TV shows provide augmented content to the viewer by special apps that run on their tablet or smartphone also known as second screen applications. In this proseminar topic, your task is to investigate how such applications should be designed such that they support an interactive TV experience based on two user perspectives: producers and viewers.

  • David Geerts, Rinze Leenheer, Dirk De Grooff, Joost Negenman, and Susanne Heijstraten. 2014. In front of and behind the second screen: viewer and producer perspectives on a companion app. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM international conference on Interactive experiences for TV and online video (TVX '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 95-102. DOI=10.1145/2602299.2602312 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2602299.2602312


Tangibles on Multi-Touch Surfaces (Simon)


Capacitive multi-touch displays are not designed to detect passive objects placed on them—in fact, these systems usually contain filters to actively reject such touch data.The PUCs paper presents a technical analysis of this problem and introduces Passive Untouched Capacitive Widgets (PUCs). Unlike previous approaches, PUCs do not require power, they can be made entirely transparent, they are detected reliably even when no user is touching them, and they do not require internal electrical or software modifications of the touch display or its driver.

  • Simon Voelker, Kosuke Nakajima, Christian Thoresen, Yuichi Itoh, Kjell Ivar Øvergård, and Jan Borchers. 2013. PUCs: detecting transparent, passive untouched capacitive widgets on unmodified multi-touch displays. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international conference on Interactive tabletops and surfaces (ITS '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 101-104. DOI=10.1145/2512349.2512791 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2512349.2512791

A survey of uninstrumented interaction techniques for selecting objects in 3D (IN ENGLISH) (Chat)

Interacting with virtual objects in 3D environment have several challenges from both the limitations of human perception (e.g., occlusion, depth perception) and the limitations of sensor technologies (e.g., indirect interaction, sensor noise). In this topic, you will survey recent research for interaction techniques for selecting objects (target acquisition) in 3D virtual environment. You will focus on the uninstrumented input techniques, i.e., those that does not require or minimally require users to hold any pointing devices. E.g., Kinect or Leap Motion based techniques are within the scope but mouse or trackpad-based techniques are not. Your report should comprise a collection of recent (5 years) interaction techniques and a comparison of them.

  • Gerd Bruder, Frank Steinicke, and Wolfgang Sturzlinger. 2013. To touch or not to touch?: comparing 2D touch and 3D mid-air interaction on stereoscopic tabletop surfaces. In Proceedings of the 1st symposium on Spatial user interaction (SUI '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 9-16. DOI=10.1145/2491367.2491369 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2491367.2491369

Shape displays (Simon)


InForm: propose utilizing shape displays in three different ways to mediate interaction: to facilitate by providing dynamic physical affordances through shape change, to restrict by guiding users with dynamic physical constraints, and to manipulate by actuating physical objects. We outline potential interaction techniques and introduce Dynamic Physical Affordances and Constraints with our inFORM system, built on top of a state-of-the-art shape display, which provides for variable stiffness rendering and real-time user input through direct touch and tangible interaction. A set of motivating examples demonstrates how dynamic affordances, constraints and object actuation can create novel interaction possibilities.

  • Sean Follmer, Daniel Leithinger, Alex Olwal, Akimitsu Hogge, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2013. inFORM: dynamic physical affordances and constraints through shape and object actuation. In Proceedings of the 26th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology (UIST '13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 417-426. DOI=10.1145/2501988.2502032 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2501988.2502032

Interactive data visualisation tools (IN ENGLISH) (Krishna)


In the digital age, the amount of data available to us has increased vastly. We need the use of visualisations (e.g., histograms, scatterplot, box plot, etc.) to visually summarise data and find interesting patterns. In this paper, you will explore a framework for exploring multivariate data that uses intuitive tools/widgets to allow data exploration and analysis. You will also learn about the interaction design of Kinetica, an interactive data visualisation tool that follows this framework, and the subsequent user study that investigated Kinetica's effectiveness.

  • Jeff Rzeszotarski and Aniket Kittur. 2014. Kinetica: Naturalistic Multi-touch Data Visualization. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems (CHI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 897 - 906. DOI=10.1145/2556288.2557231 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2556288.2557231

Alternative Source Code Editors (Jan Peter)


Source code historically has always been represented textually. The programming tools we used to edit them are often nothing more than highly specialized text editors. However, program source code is a highly structured medium that can be annotated with loads of auxiliary information to make programming easier. You will learn how source code editors can be reimagined to make use of these properties.

  • D. Asenov and P. Müller: Envision: A Fast and Flexible Visual Code Editor with Fluid Interactions (Overview)
Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC), 2014

Changing History (Jan Peter)


When creating an artifact, we can often learn a lot by exploring how it was created. You will explore this idea in the area of coding tutorials. Being able to change individual decisions in the editing history and propagate this change to all future versions of the code can help authors to fix errors in their tutorials and learners to explore the impact of certain decisions.

Shiry Ginosar, Luis Fernando De Pombo, Maneesh Agrawala, and Bjorn Hartmann. 2013. Authoring multi-stage code examples with editable code histories. In Proceedings of the 26th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology (UIST ’13)

Visualizing Algorithms (Jan-Peter)


Complex algorithms are often hard to understand from reading source code alone, for example if multiple tasks run in parallel and need to be synchronized. You will explore how visualizations can help not only to understand these algorithms but also to edit and optimize them in an intuitive way.

Oleksandr Zinenko, Stéphane Huot and Cédric Bastoul (2014) Clint: a direct manipulation tool for parallelizing compute-intensive program parts. In VL/HCC '14: Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing.


Wearable Computing (Rene)


The advent of novel materials (such as conductive fibers) combined with accessible embedded computing platforms have made it possible to re-imagine the landscapes of fabric and electronic crafts--extending these landscapes with the creative range of electronic/computational textiles or e-textiles. This paper describes the LilyPad Arduino, a fabric-based construction kit that enables novices to design and build their own soft wearables and other textile artifacts. The kit consists of a microcontroller and an assortment of sensors and actuators in stitch-able packages; these elements can be sewn to cloth substrates and each other with conductive thread to build e-textiles. This paper will introduce the latest version of the kit; reflect on its affordances; present the results of our most recent user studies; and discuss possible directions for future work in the area of personalized e-textile design and its relation to technology education.

Leah Buechley, Mike Eisenberg, Jaime Catchen, and Ali Crockett. 2008. The LilyPad Arduino: using computational textiles to investigate engagement, aesthetics, and diversity in computer science education. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '08). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 423-432. DOI=10.1145/1357054.1357123 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1357054.1357123

Personal Fabrication (Rene)


This paper investigates the use of digital fabrication for the individual production and customization of electronic devices. We present two products a pair of speakers with laser-cut parts and a computer mouse with a 3D-printed enclosure and describe their making and modification by workshop participants. The speakers target a general audience, engaging a diversity of skills and backgrounds. The mouse aims at designers, exploring the application of 3D modeling skills to the production of electronic devices. We use the case studies to discuss general implications of digital fabrication for technology production and education: enabling collaboration and iteration through open-source hardware, enhancing the products of educational technologies and experiences, and increasing the diversity of and personal connections to electronic products. The case studies also suggest opportunities for further research into tools, materials, and people.


David A. Mellis and Leah Buechley. 2012. Case studies in the personal fabrication of electronic products. In Proceedings of the Designing Interactive Systems Conference (DIS '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 268-277. DOI=10.1145/2317956.2317998 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2317956.2317998


(IN ENGLISH): The main language of supervision and all submissions for these topics will be in English. Students who wish to take these topics are responsible to ensure their English competency in at least B2 level.

Versuchen Sie, die Artikel online (s.u.) oder in der Bibliothek zu finden. Beim Kick-Off Meeting sollten Sie sich bereits darüber im Klaren sein, welche der Themen Sie besonders interessieren.

Die Bearbeitung der Themen erfolgt in Zweiergruppen. Zusätzlich suchen Sie aktuelle wissenschaftliche Publikationen zum Thema Ihres Papers und stellen diese Publikationen zusammen mit ihm vor. Wieviele zusätzliche Quellen wir erwarten hängt vom jeweiligen Thema ab und wird bei der Vorbesprechung bekannt gegeben.
Wichtige Links (der Zugriff auf die Archive ist nur innerhalb der RWTH frei, bei einer Verbindung über VPN benutzen Sie dazu bitte einen full tunnel):

Zusatzinformationen:



Created by kraemer. Last Modification: Thursday 30 of October, 2014 13:55:17 by voelker.

Media Computing Group at RWTH Aachen

Search

in: