John Hu Nov. 9, 2004 Multimodal Interfaces Oviatt, S. Multimodal interfaces Mankoff, J., Hudson, S.E., & Abowd, G.D. Interaction techniques for ambiguity.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
PUI 98 Leveraging Human Capabilities in Perceptual Interfaces George G. Robertson Microsoft Research George G. Robertson Microsoft Research.
Advertisements

GMD German National Research Center for Information Technology Darmstadt University of Technology Perspectives and Priorities for Digital Libraries Research.
National Technical University of Athens Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Image, Video and Multimedia Systems Laboratory
DELOS Highlights COSTANTINO THANOS ITALIAN NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL.
Empirical and Data-Driven Models of Multimodality Advanced Methods for Multimodal Communication Computational Models of Multimodality Adequate.
Interaction Techniques for Ambiguity Resolution in Recognition-based Interfaces Jennifer Mankoff CoC & GVU Center Georgia Tech.
C MU U sable P rivacy and S ecurity Laboratory Sensor-Based Interactions Kami Vaniea.
Ubiquitous Computing Definitions Ubiquitous computing is the method of enhancing computer use by making many computers available throughout the physical.
Languages & The Media, 5 Nov 2004, Berlin 1 New Markets, New Trends The technology side Stelios Piperidis
Design Activities in Usability Engineering laura leventhal and julie barnes.
Class 6 LBSC 690 Information Technology Human Computer Interaction and Usability.
Stanford hci group / cs376 research topics in human-computer interaction Multimodal Interfaces Scott Klemmer 15 November 2005.
Queen Mary, University of London
Single Display Groupware Ana Zanella - CPSC
CS335 Principles of Multimedia Systems Multimedia and Human Computer Interfaces Hao Jiang Computer Science Department Boston College Nov. 20, 2007.
TAUCHI – Tampere Unit for Computer-Human Interaction Tampere Unit for Human-Computer Interaction University of Tampere Markku Turunen MUMIN workshop, Helsinki,
0 HCI Today Talk about HCI Success Stories Talk about HCI Success Stories Talk about Norman’s Paper Talk about Norman’s Paper Start talking about The human.
1. Plan : 1. Models of interaction 2. Types of interaction 3. Existing technologies 4. Advances in HCI 5. Architecture 2.
1 The subArctic Input System and Extensions for Handling Inputs with Ambiguity.
1 The subArctic Input System and Extensions for Handling Inputs with Ambiguity.
Building the Design Studio of the Future Aaron Adler Jacob Eisenstein Michael Oltmans Lisa Guttentag Randall Davis October 23, 2004.
Mobile Multimodal Applications. Dr. Roman Englert, Gregor Glass March 23 rd, 2006.
A Survey on Context-Aware Computing Center for E-Business Technology Seoul National University Seoul, Korea 이상근, 이동주, 강승석, Babar Tareen Intelligent Database.
Human-Computer Interaction IS 588 Spring 2007 Week 4 Dr. Dania Bilal Dr. Lorraine Normore.
Managing Software Quality
Multimedia Specification Design and Production 2013 / Semester 2 / week 8 Lecturer: Dr. Nikos Gazepidis
Center for Human Computer Communication Department of Computer Science, OG I 1 Designing Robust Multimodal Systems for Diverse Users and Mobile Environments.
Recognition of meeting actions using information obtained from different modalities Natasa Jovanovic TKI University of Twente.
Cognitive Systems Foresight Language and Speech. Cognitive Systems Foresight Language and Speech How does the human system organise itself, as a neuro-biological.
Stanford hci group / cs376 u Scott Klemmer · 16 November 2006 Speech & Multimod al.
Human-Computer Interaction
ENTERFACE 08 Project 2 “multimodal high-level data integration” Mid-term presentation August 19th, 2008.
School of something FACULTY OF OTHER Facing Complexity Using AAC in Human User Interface Design Lisa-Dionne Morris School of Mechanical Engineering
MIT 6.893; SMA 5508 Spring 2004 Larry Rudolph Lecture Introduction Sketching Interface.
1 Human Computer Interaction Week 5 Interaction Devices and Input-Output.
1 Jennifer Mankoff CoC & GVU Center Georgia Tech Programming Support for Natural Interaction.
Digital Libraries1 David Rashty. Digital Libraries2 “A library is an arsenal of liberty” Anonymous.
Yonglei Tao School of Computing & Info Systems GVSU Ch 7 Design Guidelines.
TAUCHI – Tampere Unit for Computer-Human Interaction Markku Turunen Tampere Unit for Human-Computer Interaction University of Tampere MUMIN PhD course,
An Overview of Scientific Workflows: Domains & Applications Laboratoire Lorrain de Recherche en Informatique et ses Applications Presented by Khaled Gaaloul.
CARE properties Chris Vandervelpen
CIS 210 Systems Analysis and Development Week 7 Part II Designing Interfaces and Dialogues,
Slide no 1 Cognitive Systems in FP6 scope and focus Colette Maloney DG Information Society.
Understanding Naturally Conveyed Explanations of Device Behavior Michael Oltmans and Randall Davis MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab.
Unit 6 of COMP648 User Interface and Interaction Methods Dr Oscar Lin School of Computing and Information Systems Faculty of Science and Technology Athabasca.
Stanford hci group / cs376 u Jeffrey Heer · 19 May 2009 Speech & Multimodal Interfaces.
Pen Based User Interface Issues CSE 490RA January 25, 2005.
Software Architecture for Multimodal Interactive Systems : Voice-enabled Graphical Notebook.
WP6 Emotion in Interaction Embodied Conversational Agents WP6 core task: describe an interactive ECA system with capabilities beyond those of present day.
NCP meeting Jan 27-28, 2003, Brussels Colette Maloney Interfaces, Knowledge and Content technologies, Applications & Information Market DG INFSO Multimodal.
Speech and multimodal Jesse Cirimele. papers “Multimodal interaction” Sharon Oviatt “Designing SpeechActs” Yankelovich et al.
Multimodal and Natural computer interaction Evelina Stanevičienė.
MULTIMODAL AND NATURAL COMPUTER INTERACTION Domas Jonaitis.
AUTHOR PRADEEP KUMAR B.tech 1 st year CSE branch Gnyana saraswati college of eng. & technology Dharmaram(b)
Characteristics of Graphical and Web User Interfaces
Ten Myths of Multimodal Interaction
Talking with computers
KRISTINA Consortium Presented by: Mónica Domínguez (UPF-TALN)
Ubiquitous Computing and Augmented Realities
Human Computer Interaction Lecture 20 Universal Design
DESIGNING WEB INTERFACE Presented By, S.Yamuna AP/CSE
Multimodal Interfaces
Multimodal Human-Computer Interaction New Interaction Techniques 22. 1
Speech & Multimodal Scott Klemmer · 16 November 2006.
I/O Toolkits Scott Klemmer · 16 November 2006.
Professor John Canny Spring 2003
Characteristics of Graphical and Web User Interfaces
Proper functionality Good human computer interface Easy to maintain
Programming Support for Natural Interaction
Professor John Canny Spring 2004
Presentation transcript:

John Hu Nov. 9, 2004 Multimodal Interfaces Oviatt, S. Multimodal interfaces Mankoff, J., Hudson, S.E., & Abowd, G.D. Interaction techniques for ambiguity resolution in recognition-based interfaces

Multimodal Interfaces I An overview of the state of the art as of 2002 Definition –2 or more combined user input modes –Multimedia system output –At least one recognition-based technologies Goal –To support more transparent, flexible, efficient, and powerfully expressive means in HCI Questions –Is multimodality more about input than about output? Why or why not? –How are multimodal interfaces relate to ubicomp?

Multimodal Interfaces II Benefits –Easier to learn and use by more people –Usable in more adverse conditions: adaptability –More robust and stable recognition: better error handling through mutual disambiguation

Multimodal Interfaces III Input modes –(Keyboard, mouse,) speech, pen, touch, gestures, gaze, facial expressions… –Active vs. passive –Speech/pen input and speech & lip movements have been the focus; research on other modes is catching up Question –Will keyboard and mouse stay as non- recognition-based input modes?

Multimodal Interfaces IV Foundation and driving force –Cognitive science research –High-fidelity automatic simulations Question –Any other major contributing factors?

Multimodal Interfaces V Cognitive science underpinnings (1) –Users’ situational choice of input modes –Integration and synchronization –Individual differences vs. universal access Habit, culture, gender, language, age, personality… –Complementarity vs. redundancy in integration Questions –What other individual differences should be considered in multimodal interface design? –Any comments on complementarity and reduncancy?

Multimodal Interfaces V Cognitive science underpinnings (2) –Different features of multimodal language Brevity, semantic content, syntactic complexity, word order, disfluency rate, degree of ambiguity, referring expressions, specification of determiners, anaphora, deixis, and linguistic indirectness Questions –“The medium is the message.” Is the mode the message??? Why or why not? –Will some these features disappear in the future?

Multimodal Interfaces VI GUIs vs. Multimodal interfaces –Single event stream vs. parallel streams (of continuous and simultaneous input) –Atomic and unambiguous events vs. context and ambiguity handling –Small vs. large computational and memory requirements; centralized vs. distributed interface –Temporal constraints of mode fusion operations

Multimodal Interfaces VII Architectures and processing techniques –2 main subtypes of multimodal architecture Feature level (or “early fusion”): more appropriate for temporally synchronized input modalities Semantic level (or “late fusion”): good for less temporally coupled input modes –Processing Frame-based integration Logic-based: typed feature structures and unification-based integration Hybrid symbolic/statistical processing

Multimodal Interfaces VIII Future directions –Multidisciplinary cooperation –Input!!! Both active and passive forms are needed. –Adaptability (and adaptivity/context awareness?) Question –How can we go beyond “model(ing) human- like sensory perception?”

Interaction Techniques for Ambiguity Resolution in Recognition-Based Interfaces A discussion of issues about an integral part of multimodal interface—recognition-based interfaces Existing error correction techniques –Repetition 3 dimensions: modality, undo, and repair granularity –Choice 5 dimensions: layout, instantiation time, contextual information, interaction, and feedback –Both are called “mediation techniques”

Interaction Techniques for Ambiguity Resolution in Recognition-Based Interfaces OOPS (Organized Option Pruning System) –A toolkit that provides infrastructure for tracking and resolving ambiguity –Consistent, recognizer-independent internal model of ambiguous input that allows the separation of recognition, mediation, and application development –Reusable –Supports both automatic mediation and interactive choice and repetition techniques –Supports guided re-recognition –Has a library of standard mediators

Interaction Techniques for Ambiguity Resolution in Recognition-Based Interfaces 4 problems and respective new mediation techniques –Fixed set of choices Adding alternatives –Occlusion in choice mediators No change to the underlying applications –Target ambiguity (Other two major classes of ambiguity are recognition ambiguity and segmentation ambiguity) Magnifying lens in the area of input –Errors of omission (Some or all of the user’s input is not interpreted at all by the recognizer) Guided re-recognition

Interaction Techniques for Ambiguity Resolution in Recognition-Based Interfaces Question –What’s your take on OOPS?