Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Presented at the Design and semantics of form and movement (DeSForM) conference in Wellington, New Zealand in 2012. Read the full paper here: https://impactstory.org/GerritNiezen/product/fdn4o4a0mg1xup5csnp49jrc Outline: 1. Consider a seemingly simple task, like listening to music stored on your laptop or home stereo system from your mobile phone’s headphones in the kitchen. While it is technically possible, given the networked capabilities of modern devices, it is still practically impossible for most users. 2. Making connections between devices and exchanging information between them is mostly a painful experience for users without knowledge of network infrastructure. Network configuration settings are usually hidden deep within menu structures on devices, and if the devices are from different manufacturers there is a chance that they are not compatible with one another. What we would rather like to have an easy way of indicating that I want to exchange information on this device with that device, or use this device to control something on that device. 1. The problem is that designers and developers of devices still have a strong device-oriented view, while users’ needs are often more easily resolved within a system-oriented view. 2. Existing systems focus more on the technologies used, like Bluetooth or WiFi, instead of the task-oriented view that the user has. We aim to enable users to explore and configure connections on a high semantic level without bothering them with low-level details. 1. We defined semantic connections as the meaningful connections and relationships between entities in a smart environment. 2. These connections consist of both the real “physical” connections, such as wireless networks, and conceptual “mental” connections that seem to be there from a user’s perspective, for example the connection between a music player and a speaker. 3. We rely on the meaning of existing objects to provide meaning to the relationships between these objects, and the resulting meaning of the connected objects 4. We use location and other forms of context to provide additional meaning for these connections. 5. We use different kinds of feedback to strengthen the meaning of the connections and their emergent functionality. Connector The cylindrical shape of the Connector object was inspired by that of a small magnifying glass or hand lens. Spotlight Navigation Green – existence of a connection, Yellow – possibility of connection, Red – a connection is not possible Dummy ring added to prototype to strengthen the semantic of a mobile projector We hope that our approach presented in the paper will help other interaction designers to deal with design opportunities and challenges that emerge when designing for interoperability.
Citation preview
Where innovation starts
Controlling Smart HomeEnvironments with SemanticConnections: A Tangible andan AR Approach
Bram J.J. van der Vlist1,Gerrit Niezen1,Stefan Rapp2 and Jun Hu1
19 April 2012
2/12
/department of industrial design
Tangible approach: The Connector object
3/12
/department of industrial design
Tangible approach
4/12
/department of industrial design
AR approach: Spotlight Navigation
5/12
/department of industrial design
AR approach
6/12
/department of industrial design
Evaluation: Experimental Setup
Non-Functional Lighting (NFL)
Music Player (MP)
Lighting Device (LD)
Stereo System (SS)
Spotlight Navigation (SN)
Presence; Control;
Media; Content; Music; Lighting; Temporary
Lighting; Control;
Lighting; Preset; Permanent
Media; Content; Music; Lighting; Temporary
Lighting; Control;
Presence Sensor (PS)
Functional Lighting (FL)
Connector (CN)
Presence Sensor (PS)
(UPSTAIRS) STUDY ROOM (DOWNSTAIRS) LIVING ROOM
Lighting Device (LD)
7/12
/department of industrial design
Evaluation: Demographics
I 21 participants - 13 male, 8 femaleI Age: 23 - 34 (average 28.5)I 9 living alone, 11 cohabitingI Self-report familiarity with interactive systems:
Median score 6 (on a scale of 1 through 7)
8/12
/department of industrial design
Evaluation: Procedure
Mental models recorded using Teach-Back protocol
I “What is?” - semantic knowledgeI “How to?” - procedural knowledge
1. Performing list of predefined tasks while thinking aloud2. Exploration of system and checking of assumptions3. Elicitation of mental models and interview
9/12
/department of industrial design
Results: Mental models
10/12
/department of industrial design
Results: Mental models
11/12
/department of industrial design
Results: Mental models
I CompletenessI Semantic Connections
• Directionality• Transitivity• Priority• Temporary/persistent
I Organizational layoutI Network structure
12/12
/department of industrial design
Discussion
I “Simple way” of making connectionsI Connector object
• Part of system• “carry” content between devices
I Spotlight Navigation• Outside system• “Remote control”
I Intentional versus incidental interaction
