halo a virtual periphery for small screens devices

1
haloa virtual periphery for small screens
devices

• patrick baudischmicrosoft research,
  visualization and interaction research
• may 25th, AVI 2004 workshop
• personalized information access

2
the problem
personalized information system that tells
meabout restaurants (or attractions in theme
park or)
for timely deliveryI am using a PDAto view all
options
doesnt just tell me what to do,allows me to
choose for current situation
3
halo ltdemogt
4
contents

• halo is not a focus plus context
  technique(related work)
• halo is a lamp shining onto the street(designing
  halo)
• halo is 16-33 faster than arrow-based
  visualization techniques (user study)
• build interactive halo applications!
  (conclusions, lessons learned)

5
related work

• driving directionsvs. route planning aids
• overview-plus-detail
• focus-plus-context
• pointing into off-screen space

6

• halo design

7
cinematography

• entry and exit points
• point of view?arrow-based techniques
• partially out of the frame? halo
• rings are familiar, graceful degradation

8
streetlamps

• aura visible from distance
• aura is round
• overlapping auras aggregate
• fading of aura indicates distance
• what we changed
• smooth transition ? sharp edge
• disks ? rings
• dark background ? light background

9
reserve space for content
10
arc length distance
11
handling many objects

• find best (restaurant) relevance cut-off
• see all (dangers) merge arcs

12
app designers can use

• color
• texture
• arc thickness

13

• user study

14
interfaces

• arc/arrow fading off
• scale 110-300m/cm
• map as backdrop
• readability ok
• same selectable size
• hypothesis
• halo faster

legend
halo ring
distance from display border
15
pre-study to define tasks

• 8 participants (6 GPS users, 2 PDA users)
• informal interviews 10-40 minutes
• ? 4 tasks to be used in study

16
1. locate task
? had tosimulate on PC
click at expected location of off-screen targets
17
2. closest task
click arrow/arc or off-screen location closest to
car
18
3. traverse task
click all five targets so as to form shortest path
19
4. avoid task
click on hospital farthest away from traffic jams
20
procedure

• 12 participants
• within subject design, counterbalanced
• four training maps per interface/task,then eight
  timed maps
• questionnaire

21
task completion time
Task Arrow interface Halo interface
Locate 20.1 (7.3) 16.8 (6.7)
Closest 9.9 (10.1) 6.6 (5.3)
Traverse 20.6 (14.1) 16.8 (8.7)
Avoid 9.2 (4.7) 7.7 (5.8)
22
error rate
Task Arrow interface Halo interface
Locate 23.5 pixels (21.6) 28.4 pixels (33.8)
Closest 22 (42) 21 (41)
Traverse 97.4 pixels (94.7) 81.0 pixels (96.7)
Avoid 15 (35) 14 (34)
23
subjective preference
24
conclusions

• halo 16-33 faster than arrows
• no split attention
• distortion-free space
• scale independent
• no need to annotate distance
• perceive all rings at once treisman gormican
• limitation max number or rings
• future work applications where peripheral
  objects move and change

25
thanks!

• read more at
• www.patrickbaudisch.com
• more cool stuff
• stitching we 1100am
• fishnet thu 1130am
• thanks to
• ruth rosenholtz
• scott minneman
• allison woodruff
• the vibe gang

26
(No Transcript)
27
Extra
28
(No Transcript)