This week’s reading is the seminal paper by the late Mark Weiser in which he introduces the field of pervasive computing. Mark Weiser worked at PARC.
1. Weiser, M. (1991) The computer for the 21st century. Scientific American, 94–104.
Available at http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/SciAmDraft3.html .
Additional reading/browsing:
Winograd, T. (1997) From computing machinery to interaction design. In Peter Denning and Robert Metcalfe (eds.), Beyond Calculation: The Next Fifty Years of Computing, Springer-Verlag, 1997, 149-162. .
Available at http://hci.stanford.edu/~winograd/acm97.html .
Weiser, M. & Brown, J.S. (1996) The coming age of calm technology.
Available at: http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/acmfuture2endnote.htm.
This week will focus on non-keyboard methods of input, examining how interactions with the physical world can be coupled with digital representations in novel ways. The Ishii paper is the seminal paper on tangible computing, while the Brignull paper is one of the first on interactive, shared surfaces.
Suggestions for presenters: Since both of these papers are quite dated, look for some more recent work to present to the class as well (refer to pointers under additional browsing/reading to get started). Think about what kinds of tasks/experiences lend themselves to tangible computing, tabletop displays and gestures.
1. Ishii, H., and Ulmer, B. (1997) Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms. In Proc. of CHI’97, ACM Press. 234-241.2. Brignull, H., Izadi, S, , Fitzpatrick, G., Rogers, Y. and Rodden, T. (2004) The Introduction of a Shared Interactive Surface into a Communal Space. In Proc. of CSCW 2004, Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, ACM Press. 49-58. Available from ACM digital library
Additional browsing/reading:
Tangible and Embedded Interaction Conference:
http://www.tei-conf.org/08/index.html
http://www.tei-conf.org/07/index.html
The MIT tangible media group, presenting their vision of ‘tangible bits’
http://tangible.media.mit.edu
Work by Rekimoto on datatiles
http://www.csl.sony.co.jp/person/rekimoto/datatile/
Rekimoto, J. (1997) Pick-and-drop: A direct manipulation technique for multiple computer digital devices. In Proc. of UIST’97, ACM, ACM Press, 31-40.
Available at ACM digital library
Greenberg, S and Fitchett, C. (2001) Phidgets: Easy development of physical interfaces through physical widgets. In the Proceedings of the 14th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, Orlando, Fl. pp. 209-218.
Available at http://www.cpsc.ucalgary.ca/grouplab/papers/
Shen, C., Vernier, F.D., Forlines, C. and Ringel, M. (2004) DiamondSpin: An Extensible Toolkit for Around-the-Table Interaction, In ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2004). Available from ACM digital library.
Shahram Izadi, Harry Brignull, Tom Rodden, Yvonne Rogers and Mia Underwood (2003) Dynamo: A public interactive surface supporting the cooperative sharing and exchange of media. In Proceedings of UIST’03. Available from the ACM digital library.
Ronby-Pederson, E. et al (1993) Tivoli: an electronic whiteboard for informal workgroup meetings. In CHI Proc’93, 391-398. Available from the ACM digital library.
Streitz, N.A., Tandler, P., Muller-Tomfelde, C. and Konomi, S. (2002) Toward the next generation of human-computer interaction based on an integrated design of real and virtual worlds. In J. Carroll (ed), Human-Computer Interaction in the New Millennium, Addison-Wesley, 553-578. Available at the ACM digital library.
TableTop 2008: http://www.sriramsubramanian.com/tabletop2008/programme.html
TableTop 2007: http://www.ieeetabletop2007.org/program/index.html
This class will look at how ubicomp can be used in health care. The first paper gives a broad overview of the types of applications being pursued, while the second paper provides a specific design.
Suggestions for presenters: You probably want to present the topic in broad strokes, introducing other projects than just those covered in ther first two papers. Make sure to explore the ethical issues, as well as the more practical issues, of research in pervasive computing for health.
1. Ross, P. (2004) Managing Care through the Air. IEEE Spectrum, December 2004.2. S. Consolvo, K. Everitt, I. Smith, & J.A. landay, "Design Requirements for Technologies that Encourage Physical Activity," Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems: CHI '06, Montreal, Canada, (Apr 2006), pp.457-66.
Additional Readings
Pervasive Health Conference: http://www.pervasivehealth.org/2008/index.shtml
S. Vurgun, M Phlipose and P Pavel. A Statistical Reasoning System for Medication Prompting. In Ubicomp 2007.
Katie A. Siek, Kay H. Connelly and Yvonne Rogers. Pride and Prejudice: Learning how Chronically Ill People Think About Food. In the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI), 2006, pages 947-950.
Available from the ACM Digital Library.
Kay H. Connelly, Anne M. Faber, Yvonne Rogers, Katie A. Siek and Tammy Toscos. Mobile Applications that Empower People to Monitor their Personal Health. In Springer E&I.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/483t025165626237/
A lot of researchers are investigating Smart Homes, and/or use Living Labs for development and testing.
Suggestions for presenters: You might want to list/review the different Smart Homes or Living Labs that are around, showing the different kinds of research being pursued. Discuss the good and the bad when in comes to this research.
1. S. S. Intille, "Designing a home of the future," IEEE Pervasive Computing, vol. April-June, pp. 80-86, 2002.2. Mynatt, E., Melenhorst, A., Fisk, A.D., and Rogers, W. (2004) Aware technologies for aging in place: Understanding user needs and attitudes. Pervasive Computing, 36-41. Available from IEEE Pervasive Computing site.
Additional Reading:
Sven Meyer & Andry Rakotonirainy (2003) A survey of research on context-aware homes, In Proceedings of the Australasian Information Security Workshop Conference on ACSW frontiers, ACM Press, 21, 159-168. Available at http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=828005
Places with living labs/smart homes: Colorado, Rochester, CMU, Duke, UNC (smart office), ...
The term "context" is used a lot in Ubicomp. People use the term for different things. The first paper discusses context from the perspective of everyday people, while the second explores preferences with respect to actually using and sharing contextual information.
Suggestions for presenters: This topic can go in so many directions! Originally, researchers focused solely on location as context, because that was what was easy to gather. Now, there is so much research in this area, that there is no obvious way to organize it. Find an angle you are interested in and go for it!
1. Dourish, P. (2004) What We Talk About When We Talk About Context. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 8(1), 19-30.
2. Ashraf Khalil & Kay Connelly (2006) Context-aware Telephony: Privacy Preferences and Sharing Patterns, Ashraf Khalil and Kay Connelly. Proceedings of Computer Supported Collaborative Work (CSCW), November 2006.
Available at http://www.cs.indiana.edu/surg/Publications/cscw06.pdf
Additional reading:
C Harris and V Cahill. An Empircal Study of the Potential for Context-Aware Power Management. In Ubicomp 2007.
Anind K. Dey. Understanding and Using Context. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Journal, Volume 5 (1), 2001, pp. 4-7.
Jiang, X., N.Y. Chen, J.I. Hong, K. Wang, L.A. Takayama, and Landay, J.A. (2004) Siren: Context-aware Computing for Firefighting. In the Proceedings of Second International Conference on Pervasive Computing.
Available from ACM digital library.
This week will cover research on mobile phone usage and how it is changing the way we communicate and play. The first paper introduces a specific mobile computing application, and introduces the challenges of in-situ evaluation. The second paper touches on implementation difficulties, describing a prototyping system the authors developed.
Suggestions for presenters: You might think about what mobility provides us, in terms of applications we may develop and/or tools for researchers. Perhaps use specific research projects to demonstrate each property you identify.
1. Kjeldskov J., Skov M. B., Als B. S. and Høegh R. T. (2004) Is it Worth the Hassle? Exploring the Added Value of Evaluating the Usability of Context-Aware Mobile Systems in the Field . In Proceedings of the 6th International Mobile HCI 2004 conference. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Berlin, Springer-Verlag.
2. Raento, M., Oulasvirta, A., Petit, R. and Toivpnen, H. (2005) ContextPhone: A Prototyping Platform for Context-Aware Mobile Applications. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 4(2), 51-59.
Additional readings:
Gaetano Borriello, Matthew Chalmers, Anthony LaMarca, and Paddy Nixon (2005) Delivering REAL-WORLD Ubiquitous Location Systems, CACM, 48(3), 36-41.
Available from the ACM digital library.
O'Hara, K. Harper, R. Unger, A. Sharpe, B. Wilkes, and J. Jansen, M. (2005) TxtBoard: From text-to-person to text-to-home, In Proc. of CHI 2005, ACM Press, 1705-1708.
Available from the ACM digital library.
Steve Benford, Duncan Rowland, Martin Flintham, Adam Drozd, Richard Hull, Josephine Reid, Jo Morrison and Keri Facer (2005) Life on the Edge: Supporting Collaboration in Location-Based Experiences. In CHI'05 Proceedings, 721-730.
Obtainable from ACM Digital Library
Hightower, J. and Borriello, G. (2001) Location Systems for Ubiquitous Computing. In IEEE Computer, August 2001, 57-66. Available from IEEE.
Mobile HCI conferences (google search for each year)
Bohn, J. et al. Living in a World of Smart Everyday Objects – Social, Economic, and Ethical Implications. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment 10: 2004. 763-785.
Lockton, V. Rosenberg, Richard. RFID: The Next Serious Threat to Privacy. Ethics and Information Technology: 7: 4 (December 2005): 221-231.
This week we will be learning about Ambient Displays and Ambient Information Systems. There are many definitions of "ambient" in the literature, making it difficult to identify ambient systems. THe first paper proposes a framework for different ambient traits, and discusses the challenges of doing research on ambient displays. The second paper also defines what they mean by ambient,before describing two examples that they devised.
Suggestions for presenters: There are lots of examples of ambient displays in the literature. You might get the class to "define" ambient, then go through a bunch of examples to see if they are classified as ambient or not. Discussing the challenges in evaluation would be interesting as well.
1. Hazlewood, W and Lorcan Coyle. On Ambient Information Systems: Challenges of Design and Evaluation. TO appear in IIJACI Special Addition on Ambient Information Systems.2. Wsneski, C., Ishii, H. and Dahley, A. Ambient Displays: Turning Architectural Spaces into an Interface between People and Digital Information. Published in the Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Cooperative Buildings (CoBuild '98), February 25-26, 1998.
Additional Reading:
Tobias Skog, Sara Ljungblad and Lars Erik Holmquist, between Aesthetics and Utility: Designing Ambient Information Visualizations. In the Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Cooperative Buildings (CoBuild '98), February 25-26, 1998.
This class will cover the range of sensor technologies and how they can be used. The first paper gives an overview of many types of sensors and how they had been used up to 2004. The second paper looks at how sensors can be used to identify activities in the home.
Suggestions for presenters: You probably don't want to spend much time on the first paper, but can assume the class has read it. Instead, you can introduce some other sensor projects, such as those listed in the additional reading. The Chang paper gives an example of how mathematical models might be used to interpret sensor data, while the Burrell paper gives a nice case study of user-centered design in ubicomp.
1. M. Beigl, A. Krohn, T. Zimmer, C. Decker (2004) Typical Sensors needed in Ubiquitous and Pervasive Computing". Proceedings of INSS 2004.2. B. Logan, J. Healey, M. Philipose, E. M. Tapia and S. Intille (2007) A Long Term Evaluation of Sensing Modalities for Activity Recognition. Proceedings of Ubicomp 2007.
Additional Reading:
K-h Chang, M Y Chen and J Canny (2007) Tracking Free-Weight Exercises. Proceedings of Ubicomp 2007.
Burrell, J., Brooke, T., Beckwith, R. (2004) Vineyard Computing: Sensor Networks in agricultural production, Pervasive Computing, 3(1), 38-45.
Available from IEEE Pervasive Computing site.
This class discusses how technology can be used for gaming off of the desktop. The first paper gives a broad overview of the different types of games that researchers have explored. The second paper provides an in-depth look at one particular game, in the area of health.
Suggestions for presenters: There are lots of videos of “pervasive games” out there. Pick one or two that show different kinds of experiences (eg., urban game v.s. health game v.s. learning game) and center a discussion about what is unique about pervasive games. Can they help us learn? Or is it just fun? What are the challenges, restrictions, and requirements to have a successful pervasive game? How can such a game be evaluated?
1. Magerkurth, C., Cheok, A., Mandryk, R. and Nilsen, T. (2005). Pervasive Games: Bringing Computer Entertainment Back to the Real World. In ACM Computers and Entertainment, Vol. 3, No. 3, July 2005.
2. Lin, J, Mamykina, L, Lindtner, S., Delajoux, G., and Strub, H. (2006) Fish’n’Steps: Encouraging Physcial Activity with an Interactive Computer Game. In Ubicomp 2006, (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol 4206/2006), p 261-278.
Moving computing from the desktop into the real world poses significant challenges for how we design and evaluate such systems. The first paper introduces cultural probes, a technique for learning more about the context of your design, while the second paper shows how a more traditional evaluation technique compares to one designed specifically for the project.
Suggestions for presenters: Be controversial. There is no one size fits all solution to evaluation of Ubicomp. Present a few different approaches (some we've already seen in the class), and let the class debate/classify when to use what.
1. Gaver, W., Dunne, T., Pacenti, E.:Cultural Probes and the value of uncertainty. In Interactions, 11:5, 2004, 53-562. Shen, X., Eades, P., Hong, S. and Moere, A. Intrusive and Non-Intrusive Evaluation of Ambient Displays. To appear in IIJACI Special Addition on Ambient Information Systems.
Additional Readings:
Consolvo, S. and Walker, M.:Using the experience sampling method to evaluate Ubicomp applications. In IEEE Computing Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems, 2:2 (2003), 24-31
Available from IEEE
Yvonne Rogers. New theoretical approaches for human-computer interaction. Book chapter in Annual review of Information Science and Technology.
This class will look at frameworks for evaluating pervasive computing applications by looking at an attempt to standardize the evaluation lexicon and an argument that perhaps evaluation shouldn't be our focus.
Suggestions for presenters: Again, be controversial. The first paper tries to lay out all the possible evaluation dimensions, while the second argues we may not always want to evaluate. What's the right answer? Is there a correct answer?
1. Jean Scholtz and Sunny Consolvo. (2004) Toward a Framework for Evaluating Ubiquitous Computing Applications. In IEEE Pervasive Computing, April-June 2004, 82-88.
Available from IEEE
2. S. Greenberg and B. Buxton. Usability Evaluation Considered Harmful (Some of the Time). In CHI 2008.
Additional Readings:
Kay Connelly. Towards a Pervasive Technology Acceptance Model. In Ubiquitous System Evaluation (USE) -- a workshop at the Ninth International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing (UBICOMP), 2007.
This class will focus on novel applications that have been developed for supporting learning and playing, examining contrasting approaches.
Suggestions for presenters: I should be able to help you dig up a few videos of the systems described in both papers. CSCW might have some related work as well.
1. Rogers, Y., Price, S., Fitzpatrick, G., Fleck, R., Harris, E., Smith, H., Randell, C., Muller, H., O’Malley, C., Stanton, D., Thompson, M. and Weal, M. (2004) Ambient Wood: Designing new forms of digital augmentation for learning outdoors. In Proc. Interaction Design and Children, ACM. 1-8.2. Yvonne Rogers, Kay Connelly, Lenore Tedesco, William Hazlewood, Andrew J. Kurtz, Bob E. Hall, Josh Hursey and Tammy Toscos. Why it's Worth the Hassle: A Case Study in Using In-Situ Studies during Design. In Ubicomp 2007.
Additional Reading:
Yuanchun Shi, Weikai Xie, Guangyou Xu, Runting Shi, Enyi Chen, Yanhua Mao, and Fang Liu (2003) The Smart Classroom: Merging Technologies for Seamless Tele-Education. Pervasive Computing, April-June 2003, 47-55.
Available at http://csdl.computer.org/comp/mags/pc/2003/02/b2toc.htm
This class will look at a recent paper which moves beyond Weiser’s original vision of pervasive computing.
Suggestions for presenters: Try to tease out where the class, at the end of the semester, thinks the important directions are for the field. Do people buy into Rogers' thesis, or is Weiser's vision still relevant? Or are they both wrong? This is a perfect session to be controversial!
1. Yvonne Rogers. (2006) Pervasive Computing: Design Challenges for the Information Professions. Ubicomp, 2006.