Summary
The author writes about B.F. Skinner, a behavioral scientist during the mid 1900s. Skinner was famous for experiments inducing animals to respond to stimuli, and a controversial figure.
Discussion
I wish the author would spend more time talking about things of substance, and less waxing poetic about Skinner's skinny dipping habits and the eye color of his daughter. I did note, however, the relationship of WoW farming to the irregular rewarding lever experiment.
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Microblog #6, "Coming of Age in Samoa, Chapter 2, Appendixes II and V"
2
Summary
This chapter describes a day on Samoa, in the time frame of the writing. The description is very colorful, and written in the present tense.
Discussion
Does the present tense indicate the chapter was written by the author while present? I also noted that western culture had begun to penetrate Samoa by this time, as evidenced by the hymn singing.
II
Summary
The author describes her methodology for the study. In particular, she notes that there were only 68 girls in the three villages she was in, a mediocre sample size, and that time constraints also negatively impacted the rigor of the study.
Discussion
I do like that she spent more time on the weaknesses of her study than the strengths. A critical analysis tends to be a better sign than a sales pitch, in my estimation.
V
Summary
A statistical listing of the sixty-eight girls mentioned above. Many factors related to growing, puberty, and residence were charted, apparently partially from observation and partially from surveys.
Discussion
There is one serious flaw with her tables: it is not clearly indicated whether the " symbol indicates "no answer" or "as above". Also, I found reading "TABLE I" an uncomfortable experience; the information was a lot more personal than I wanted to know about.
Summary
This chapter describes a day on Samoa, in the time frame of the writing. The description is very colorful, and written in the present tense.
Discussion
Does the present tense indicate the chapter was written by the author while present? I also noted that western culture had begun to penetrate Samoa by this time, as evidenced by the hymn singing.
II
Summary
The author describes her methodology for the study. In particular, she notes that there were only 68 girls in the three villages she was in, a mediocre sample size, and that time constraints also negatively impacted the rigor of the study.
Discussion
I do like that she spent more time on the weaknesses of her study than the strengths. A critical analysis tends to be a better sign than a sales pitch, in my estimation.
V
Summary
A statistical listing of the sixty-eight girls mentioned above. Many factors related to growing, puberty, and residence were charted, apparently partially from observation and partially from surveys.
Discussion
There is one serious flaw with her tables: it is not clearly indicated whether the " symbol indicates "no answer" or "as above". Also, I found reading "TABLE I" an uncomfortable experience; the information was a lot more personal than I wanted to know about.
Microblog #5, "Design of Everyday Things, Chapter 2"
Summary
In this chapter, the author discusses the places and reasons people assign blame for being unable to operate devices. Prominently featured are the differences between conceptual and actual models, and the authors seven stages of executing a task.
Discussion
I find his examples more interesting than his theories and explanations. In particular, the airplane incident was a fascinating example of a series of dominoes. Most of his points about how things should be designed are the same as from the first chapter.
In this chapter, the author discusses the places and reasons people assign blame for being unable to operate devices. Prominently featured are the differences between conceptual and actual models, and the authors seven stages of executing a task.
Discussion
I find his examples more interesting than his theories and explanations. In particular, the airplane incident was a fascinating example of a series of dominoes. Most of his points about how things should be designed are the same as from the first chapter.
Paper Reading #4, Critical Point
http://detentionblockaa32.blogspot.com/2011/01/paper-reading-4-hard-to-use-interfaces.html
http://vincehci.blogspot.com/2011/01/paper-reading-4-cross-currents.html
Critical Point, A Composition for Cello and Computer
Roger Dannenburg, Carnegie Mellon and Tomas Laurenzo, University of the Republic, Uruguay
Presented and CHI 2010 : Media Showcase Session 1
10-15 April 2010 Atlanta, Georgia
Summary
The authors discuss a piece of software written for the computer designed to enhance the musical performance of a cello player. Critical Point is intended to expand the cellists range of available chords beyond that physically possible on just the instrument, allow new sounds and "sonic textures", and add some random elements to cause more variation in the music being played. This is all intended to be achieved while leaving the cellist in creative control.
The effects used include "combination pitch shifting with delay and feedback", the random algorithims, a vocoder, and a section involving rising and falling glissandi.
The result was performed at the Pittsburgh New Music Ensemble in 2009. There are references to an animation, but it doesn't appear to be where Google can find it, if it is online at all.
The implementation was a dedicated computer low level audio processing (written in C++), a program for "software digital audio patching" in an unspecified language, and a real time scripting component in a language called Serpent. Interestingly, no discussion of future directions for the research are mentioned in the paper.
Discussion
I'd like to start this section by noting I know next to nothing about music. This paper was mostly incomprehensible to me, although unlike the last one I don't think this instance is the fault of the author in any way.
The idea of using a computer to enhance the range of options available to a performer and his instrument seems fundamentally sound to me. I can't really comment on the effects produced by this device without at least audio rather than text, which I don't have. I suspect that further advancement of this program would involve refining the algorithms involved for improved quality and possibly adding more features, although I lack the knowledge in the music area to say what they might be.
One quibble I did have with the paper was the organization of information. They talked about the results they got before they discussed what they, a break from the conventional format that I found jarring and unhelpful. The ordering of information they used is reflected in the summary section.
http://vincehci.blogspot.com/2011/01/paper-reading-4-cross-currents.html
Critical Point, A Composition for Cello and Computer
Roger Dannenburg, Carnegie Mellon and Tomas Laurenzo, University of the Republic, Uruguay
Presented and CHI 2010 : Media Showcase Session 1
10-15 April 2010 Atlanta, Georgia
Summary
The authors discuss a piece of software written for the computer designed to enhance the musical performance of a cello player. Critical Point is intended to expand the cellists range of available chords beyond that physically possible on just the instrument, allow new sounds and "sonic textures", and add some random elements to cause more variation in the music being played. This is all intended to be achieved while leaving the cellist in creative control.
The effects used include "combination pitch shifting with delay and feedback", the random algorithims, a vocoder, and a section involving rising and falling glissandi.
The result was performed at the Pittsburgh New Music Ensemble in 2009. There are references to an animation, but it doesn't appear to be where Google can find it, if it is online at all.
The implementation was a dedicated computer low level audio processing (written in C++), a program for "software digital audio patching" in an unspecified language, and a real time scripting component in a language called Serpent. Interestingly, no discussion of future directions for the research are mentioned in the paper.
Discussion
I'd like to start this section by noting I know next to nothing about music. This paper was mostly incomprehensible to me, although unlike the last one I don't think this instance is the fault of the author in any way.
The idea of using a computer to enhance the range of options available to a performer and his instrument seems fundamentally sound to me. I can't really comment on the effects produced by this device without at least audio rather than text, which I don't have. I suspect that further advancement of this program would involve refining the algorithms involved for improved quality and possibly adding more features, although I lack the knowledge in the music area to say what they might be.
One quibble I did have with the paper was the organization of information. They talked about the results they got before they discussed what they, a break from the conventional format that I found jarring and unhelpful. The ordering of information they used is reflected in the summary section.
This is what a cello looks like. Source: Wikipedia.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Paper Reading #3, "Grassroots heritage in the crisis context"
http://lroberts-tamuchi.blogspot.com/2011/01/paper-reading-3-robotany-breeze.html
http://chi2010-cskach.blogspot.com/2011/01/paper-reading-3-recognizing-shapes-and.html
"Grassroots Heritage in the Crisis Context: A Social Media Probes Approach to Studying Heritage in a Participatory Age"
Sophia B. Liu
Presented at the CHI 2010 Doctoral Consortium in Atlanta, 10-15 April 2010.
Summary
The author discusses her methods of researching the structures of grassroots heritage in the context of how it handles and disseminates knowledge about crises and catastrophes (the example used being the New York and Pentagon attacks of 2001). Some techniques of doing so are listed, followed by explaining that the primary one used was a "social media probe" and citing a paper which I presume explains exactly what that might be.
She summarizes (two paragraphs) what she has done so far. Her project had 33 participants at the time of writing, and expected to add another 10 or so. The example probe given asked the participants to choose 7 events from a 9/11 timeline and create the story they would tell about that event 50 years from now. She finishes by describing her "grassroots heritage framework" (pictured below) and a note on the contributions she expects her work to make.
Discussion
This was easily my least favorite of the three papers I have read to date for this class. Realize I am attempting to be analytical and not insulting when I say this, but she used a lot of words to say next to nothing. There seemed to be a set of quotation marks on every other line, which is a sign of both heavy usage of terms she was defining as she went and of using portions of cited works to explain concepts in her own. Neither is inherently bad, but they made this paper very difficult to read. Another item I noted along the same lines is that, while constantly telling us that "I conducted..research", "my interdisciplinary research informs studies in...", etc she never told us how she was conducting the research, aside from the one example dealing with 9/11. I think you can understand how this was frustrating to my attempts to write about her research,
I also noted that she said he research should "“open up new design spaces” by provoking “the users to consider their environment in a new way "" (Yes, I did have to quote her quotation marks). If she is researching how people handle information, why is she actively attempting to change the way they do so?
I almost feel that I must be completely misunderstanding something.
I'm not trying to say that her work isn't valuable, useful, or interesting in any way. The way people organize historical is an interesting subject. I just can't say anything about how I think her research would help or not in this area, because I can't seem to divine what it is from her paper.
http://chi2010-cskach.blogspot.com/2011/01/paper-reading-3-recognizing-shapes-and.html
"Grassroots Heritage in the Crisis Context: A Social Media Probes Approach to Studying Heritage in a Participatory Age"
Sophia B. Liu
Presented at the CHI 2010 Doctoral Consortium in Atlanta, 10-15 April 2010.
Summary
The author discusses her methods of researching the structures of grassroots heritage in the context of how it handles and disseminates knowledge about crises and catastrophes (the example used being the New York and Pentagon attacks of 2001). Some techniques of doing so are listed, followed by explaining that the primary one used was a "social media probe" and citing a paper which I presume explains exactly what that might be.
She summarizes (two paragraphs) what she has done so far. Her project had 33 participants at the time of writing, and expected to add another 10 or so. The example probe given asked the participants to choose 7 events from a 9/11 timeline and create the story they would tell about that event 50 years from now. She finishes by describing her "grassroots heritage framework" (pictured below) and a note on the contributions she expects her work to make.
Discussion
This was easily my least favorite of the three papers I have read to date for this class. Realize I am attempting to be analytical and not insulting when I say this, but she used a lot of words to say next to nothing. There seemed to be a set of quotation marks on every other line, which is a sign of both heavy usage of terms she was defining as she went and of using portions of cited works to explain concepts in her own. Neither is inherently bad, but they made this paper very difficult to read. Another item I noted along the same lines is that, while constantly telling us that "I conducted..research", "my interdisciplinary research informs studies in...", etc she never told us how she was conducting the research, aside from the one example dealing with 9/11. I think you can understand how this was frustrating to my attempts to write about her research,
I also noted that she said he research should "“open up new design spaces” by provoking “the users to consider their environment in a new way "" (Yes, I did have to quote her quotation marks). If she is researching how people handle information, why is she actively attempting to change the way they do so?
I almost feel that I must be completely misunderstanding something.
I'm not trying to say that her work isn't valuable, useful, or interesting in any way. The way people organize historical is an interesting subject. I just can't say anything about how I think her research would help or not in this area, because I can't seem to divine what it is from her paper.
Source: The paper in question.
Microblog #4, "HCI Remixed, Chpater 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 34"
24
Summary
In this chapter, the author discusses a "simulated listening typewriter", in which John Gould used a man "behind a curtain" to evaluate what features were most desirable in a voice/word recognition system on a computer and what roles it might have. The experiment dates from 1983 and the author lauds it for its thoroughness.
Discussion
The "Wizard of Oz" technique described is a simple and efficient way to "pre-test" developing technology, and I found it quite interesting. I also felt that the author of this paper did a good job identifying the major weakness in Gould's study. That is, the proliferation of typing skills in recent years.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25
Summary
The author, Steve Harrison of Virginia Tech, talks about a precursor project to modern conceptions of video-meditated communication. The project, Hole in Space, was done by a pair of artists named Galloway and Rabinowitz. The project consisted of large televisions and sound systems being placed on storefronts in New York and LA, each project the sight and sounds from its area to the other.
Discussion
I found it pretty funny that artists easily got the funding for such a project while the computer scientists had great difficulty with it. The idea of an almost full connection to another location at some distance made me think. I suspect the novelty would wear off fairly quickly, but the sudden change in dynamics it must have presented to passerby is interesting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26
Summary
Scott Jenson, who works for Google, makes observations about complexity and functionality, using the context of elevator buttons. The base is an E.R. Tufte paper from 1990 which he mostly seems just be summarizing for the audience. His argument is that we should consider carefully if functions are actually needed or simply increase complexity without adequate purpose.
Discussion
He makes a very good point, although in this specific case I agree the button needs to stay. The idae of increasing size and color coding is fine, but what's wrong with assuming literacy and labeling them OPEN DOORS and CLOSE DOORS?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
27
Summary
Jodi Forlizzi of Carnegie Mellon discusses "kinetic typography", using position and motion to communicaet additional information. The paper reads as a brief summary of a few researchers in the field followed by a similarly brief summary of some of the techniques that can be applied to the text to get the desired effects.
Discussion
The initial item described, navigating through 3d text, I am kind of skeptical of. As a means of researching means of text, sure, but text was designed to communicate information effectively in two dimensions; I think in three something considerably different would be optimal.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
28
Summary
Steve Whittaker of the University of Sheffield reexamines a paper by an A. Kidd from 1994 dealing with information storage. The argument is that simply storing information is not particularly useful, but rather recalling the information when needed, and that current system are good at the former but not the latter.
Discussion
I think some very good points are made regarding the organization of information, but I think the author's point may overshoot the mark. Modern search tools are becoming increasingly good. I will note that when I can't find something in my archives it is usually due to poor file name choice rather than poor folder choice.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
34
Summary
Michael Muller of IBM discusses the impact of a paper he read dealing with historians working between Congress and various American Indian nations in the postwar timeframe on his approach to HCI. He likens the historians' position to the relationships between users, programmers, and company executives in several ways.
Discussion
I think he's drawing parallels too strongly. I agree that there are some political consideration in going between different groups, and I can understand that epiphany coming from a source like Krupat's paper, but I think that the analogy isn't as tight as Muller thinks it is.
Summary
In this chapter, the author discusses a "simulated listening typewriter", in which John Gould used a man "behind a curtain" to evaluate what features were most desirable in a voice/word recognition system on a computer and what roles it might have. The experiment dates from 1983 and the author lauds it for its thoroughness.
Discussion
The "Wizard of Oz" technique described is a simple and efficient way to "pre-test" developing technology, and I found it quite interesting. I also felt that the author of this paper did a good job identifying the major weakness in Gould's study. That is, the proliferation of typing skills in recent years.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
25
Summary
The author, Steve Harrison of Virginia Tech, talks about a precursor project to modern conceptions of video-meditated communication. The project, Hole in Space, was done by a pair of artists named Galloway and Rabinowitz. The project consisted of large televisions and sound systems being placed on storefronts in New York and LA, each project the sight and sounds from its area to the other.
Discussion
I found it pretty funny that artists easily got the funding for such a project while the computer scientists had great difficulty with it. The idea of an almost full connection to another location at some distance made me think. I suspect the novelty would wear off fairly quickly, but the sudden change in dynamics it must have presented to passerby is interesting.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
26
Summary
Scott Jenson, who works for Google, makes observations about complexity and functionality, using the context of elevator buttons. The base is an E.R. Tufte paper from 1990 which he mostly seems just be summarizing for the audience. His argument is that we should consider carefully if functions are actually needed or simply increase complexity without adequate purpose.
Discussion
He makes a very good point, although in this specific case I agree the button needs to stay. The idae of increasing size and color coding is fine, but what's wrong with assuming literacy and labeling them OPEN DOORS and CLOSE DOORS?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
27
Summary
Jodi Forlizzi of Carnegie Mellon discusses "kinetic typography", using position and motion to communicaet additional information. The paper reads as a brief summary of a few researchers in the field followed by a similarly brief summary of some of the techniques that can be applied to the text to get the desired effects.
Discussion
The initial item described, navigating through 3d text, I am kind of skeptical of. As a means of researching means of text, sure, but text was designed to communicate information effectively in two dimensions; I think in three something considerably different would be optimal.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
28
Summary
Steve Whittaker of the University of Sheffield reexamines a paper by an A. Kidd from 1994 dealing with information storage. The argument is that simply storing information is not particularly useful, but rather recalling the information when needed, and that current system are good at the former but not the latter.
Discussion
I think some very good points are made regarding the organization of information, but I think the author's point may overshoot the mark. Modern search tools are becoming increasingly good. I will note that when I can't find something in my archives it is usually due to poor file name choice rather than poor folder choice.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
34
Summary
Michael Muller of IBM discusses the impact of a paper he read dealing with historians working between Congress and various American Indian nations in the postwar timeframe on his approach to HCI. He likens the historians' position to the relationships between users, programmers, and company executives in several ways.
Discussion
I think he's drawing parallels too strongly. I agree that there are some political consideration in going between different groups, and I can understand that epiphany coming from a source like Krupat's paper, but I think that the analogy isn't as tight as Muller thinks it is.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Ethnography Ideas
I'm trying to keep things of the same sort as seen in
http://tamuchi-spring2011.blogspot.com/2010/01/ethnography-topic-examples.html
and also trying to keep it related to HCI by keeping it to areas that involve interaction with computers.
1. Observe how high the rate of basic "computer literacy" is. That is, how many people are capable (or think they are capable) of basic tasks like changing the ink in their printers or plugging in cabling correctly. This would tell us whether folks are using the full capabilities of their equipment or, like the people from the Design of Everyday Things*, have just figured out how to do a few things and have made no effort to understand the rest.
2. (Note: Heavily "borrowing" from Manoj's #5) Observe how often CS students ignore the "no food in the computer lab" rule. This would give information on how much respect they have for minor regulations for the reg's own sake, and how comfortable they are with the organization of the lab system.
3. (One unrelated to computers, just for variety) Observe how the teams in the intramural sports organize themselves internally. Would give us information on how college students self-organize their voluntary activities.
*who just pick two settings on a fancy washer and nothing else, etc.
http://tamuchi-spring2011.blogspot.com/2010/01/ethnography-topic-examples.html
and also trying to keep it related to HCI by keeping it to areas that involve interaction with computers.
1. Observe how high the rate of basic "computer literacy" is. That is, how many people are capable (or think they are capable) of basic tasks like changing the ink in their printers or plugging in cabling correctly. This would tell us whether folks are using the full capabilities of their equipment or, like the people from the Design of Everyday Things*, have just figured out how to do a few things and have made no effort to understand the rest.
2. (Note: Heavily "borrowing" from Manoj's #5) Observe how often CS students ignore the "no food in the computer lab" rule. This would give information on how much respect they have for minor regulations for the reg's own sake, and how comfortable they are with the organization of the lab system.
3. (One unrelated to computers, just for variety) Observe how the teams in the intramural sports organize themselves internally. Would give us information on how college students self-organize their voluntary activities.
*who just pick two settings on a fancy washer and nothing else, etc.
Microblog #3, "HCI Remixed Chapters 1,4,5,18,20,23
Summary
The chapters each comprised an essay on an HCI related topic. 1,4, and 5 were largely historical, while 18, 20, and 23 were on the impact of technology on humans interacting with other humans.
1 was written by a William Buxton from Microsoft research. It detailed how a music machine led him to jump fields from music to HCI.
4 was by Joesph Konstan, University of Minnesota. It was about SketchPad, an early and resource intensive sketching program. Konstan discusses the design of the device and its influence on later software of that type, which he sees as positive.
In 5, Wendy Ju of Stanford University discusses the impact that an early demo video of a mouse and her reflections had on her. It's worth noting that the first the chapters all deal with devices that antedate 1972.
In 18, Saul Greenberg of the University of Calgary writes about the effect of shared workspace layout on group dynamics. He also discusses directions he thinks future moves in that field could take.
In 20, Geraldine Fitzpatrick of the University of Sussex discusses the impact of computing on cooperative work. Specifically, she looks initially at the work of a 1992 paper by K. Schmidt and L. Bannon and touches on modern and future workplace techniques in light of it.
In 23, Brian Smith of Penn State discusses using computers not to facilitate long distance communication by to enhance face-to-face communication. He gives the example of IMing during a meeting.
Discussion
The historical context was, as such things are, pretty interesting. That sort of thing always provides perspective.
1's biggest contribution, I feel, was to illustrate how many ideas in computing predated mainstream implementation by some time. Well designed interfaces do not require high technology.
For 4, I found the detail that stuck was using highlighted pixels instead of physical contact. Simple and elegant but non-obvious solution to a problem. I wonder if that would work on today's pen interfaces.
In 5, I think the point the author was really trying to get across was the value of demos. She makes her case well, but I think lays on the nostalgia a little bit too strongly.
The most thought provoking essay, however, was the fourth (#18) which dealt with the effect of whiteboard paper vs. table paper. I don't know if it leads to any useful conclusions, but it was interesting.
Paper 20's biggest weakness, I think, was diving really heavily into jargon (possibly also excessive use of quotation marks). I do not feel confident that I have correctly understood her paper. However, I agree that seeing the future of this field will be interesting.
Paper 23 was probably objectively the best of the bunch, even if 4 struck a little closer to areas I have experience with. The IMs point was very well made. I wonder how close Mr. (Dr.? paper doesn't make it clear) would consider two people with a high quality voice channel both logged into a virtual environment to face-to-face communication.
The chapters each comprised an essay on an HCI related topic. 1,4, and 5 were largely historical, while 18, 20, and 23 were on the impact of technology on humans interacting with other humans.
1 was written by a William Buxton from Microsoft research. It detailed how a music machine led him to jump fields from music to HCI.
4 was by Joesph Konstan, University of Minnesota. It was about SketchPad, an early and resource intensive sketching program. Konstan discusses the design of the device and its influence on later software of that type, which he sees as positive.
In 5, Wendy Ju of Stanford University discusses the impact that an early demo video of a mouse and her reflections had on her. It's worth noting that the first the chapters all deal with devices that antedate 1972.
In 18, Saul Greenberg of the University of Calgary writes about the effect of shared workspace layout on group dynamics. He also discusses directions he thinks future moves in that field could take.
In 20, Geraldine Fitzpatrick of the University of Sussex discusses the impact of computing on cooperative work. Specifically, she looks initially at the work of a 1992 paper by K. Schmidt and L. Bannon and touches on modern and future workplace techniques in light of it.
In 23, Brian Smith of Penn State discusses using computers not to facilitate long distance communication by to enhance face-to-face communication. He gives the example of IMing during a meeting.
Discussion
The historical context was, as such things are, pretty interesting. That sort of thing always provides perspective.
1's biggest contribution, I feel, was to illustrate how many ideas in computing predated mainstream implementation by some time. Well designed interfaces do not require high technology.
For 4, I found the detail that stuck was using highlighted pixels instead of physical contact. Simple and elegant but non-obvious solution to a problem. I wonder if that would work on today's pen interfaces.
In 5, I think the point the author was really trying to get across was the value of demos. She makes her case well, but I think lays on the nostalgia a little bit too strongly.
The most thought provoking essay, however, was the fourth (#18) which dealt with the effect of whiteboard paper vs. table paper. I don't know if it leads to any useful conclusions, but it was interesting.
Paper 20's biggest weakness, I think, was diving really heavily into jargon (possibly also excessive use of quotation marks). I do not feel confident that I have correctly understood her paper. However, I agree that seeing the future of this field will be interesting.
Paper 23 was probably objectively the best of the bunch, even if 4 struck a little closer to areas I have experience with. The IMs point was very well made. I wonder how close Mr. (Dr.? paper doesn't make it clear) would consider two people with a high quality voice channel both logged into a virtual environment to face-to-face communication.
Saturday, January 22, 2011
Paper Reading #2, TAVR
http://chi2010-cskach.blogspot.com/2011/01/reading-2-exploring-interfaces-to.html
http://jd-hci.blogspot.com/2011/01/paper-reading-2-early-explorations-of.html
TAVR: Temporal-aural-visual Representation for Representing Imperceptible Spatial Information
Minyoung Song, University of Michigan
Presented at CHI 2010: Doctoral Consortium held in Atlanta, Georgia on 10-15 April 2010
Summary
TAVR is an approach designed by University of Michigan student Minyoung Song to assist middle school and higher students in comprehending differences in scale between microscopic objects. The system is designed to use temporal, audio, and visual demonstrations simultaneously, based on the dual coding theory of learning cited in the paper.
The implementation is as follows: A visual representation of the head of a pin is displayed, and is gradually filled with the object whose size is being demonstrated (i.e. a red blood cell) at the rate of one per 0.1 seconds. Each time an object is added, there is an audible click and the visual representation is updated as needed. As seems intuitive, the temporal element is how long the pin takes to fill, the aural element is the clicks, and the visual element representation is the picture of the needle.
The example application, "Wow, It Is Small" (WIIS), uses the above approach as was found to have some success in test runs with middle school students. The next planned stages of research are comparisons to existing methods for teaching microscopic scales and investigations into which of the modes (temporal, aural, visal) or combinations thereof is most effective.
Description
I found this approach to be intriguing. Scaling is a subject that can be very difficult to actually understand, and I can certainly understand the benefits of a multi-pronged attack on the problem. Certainly it is interesting for this alone, and I feel that it has promise in the significant area of primary education.
I must confess to be quite disappointed there wasn't even so much as a good screenshot to look at, in either the paper of one of several cursory Google searches, as a demonstration of the software. I feel that this idea is something that I could have understood visually better than through a text based description. I almost want to call that ironic.
Were I in charge of the research and looking for further avenues of research not already presented in the paper, both of which are good directions themselves, I would likely move into the difficult to comprehend macroscopic end of things. The relationship between "pin" and object would likely have to be reversed (that is, I would gradually cover the large object with some known, relatively large object rather than the reverse). I think this has at least a chance of generating greater interest than microscopic objects. Consider, anecdotally, that "size of stars", according to Google Trends, is twice as popular as "size of atoms".
http://jd-hci.blogspot.com/2011/01/paper-reading-2-early-explorations-of.html
TAVR: Temporal-aural-visual Representation for Representing Imperceptible Spatial Information
Minyoung Song, University of Michigan
Presented at CHI 2010: Doctoral Consortium held in Atlanta, Georgia on 10-15 April 2010
Summary
TAVR is an approach designed by University of Michigan student Minyoung Song to assist middle school and higher students in comprehending differences in scale between microscopic objects. The system is designed to use temporal, audio, and visual demonstrations simultaneously, based on the dual coding theory of learning cited in the paper.
The implementation is as follows: A visual representation of the head of a pin is displayed, and is gradually filled with the object whose size is being demonstrated (i.e. a red blood cell) at the rate of one per 0.1 seconds. Each time an object is added, there is an audible click and the visual representation is updated as needed. As seems intuitive, the temporal element is how long the pin takes to fill, the aural element is the clicks, and the visual element representation is the picture of the needle.
The example application, "Wow, It Is Small" (WIIS), uses the above approach as was found to have some success in test runs with middle school students. The next planned stages of research are comparisons to existing methods for teaching microscopic scales and investigations into which of the modes (temporal, aural, visal) or combinations thereof is most effective.
Description
I found this approach to be intriguing. Scaling is a subject that can be very difficult to actually understand, and I can certainly understand the benefits of a multi-pronged attack on the problem. Certainly it is interesting for this alone, and I feel that it has promise in the significant area of primary education.
I must confess to be quite disappointed there wasn't even so much as a good screenshot to look at, in either the paper of one of several cursory Google searches, as a demonstration of the software. I feel that this idea is something that I could have understood visually better than through a text based description. I almost want to call that ironic.
Were I in charge of the research and looking for further avenues of research not already presented in the paper, both of which are good directions themselves, I would likely move into the difficult to comprehend macroscopic end of things. The relationship between "pin" and object would likely have to be reversed (that is, I would gradually cover the large object with some known, relatively large object rather than the reverse). I think this has at least a chance of generating greater interest than microscopic objects. Consider, anecdotally, that "size of stars", according to Google Trends, is twice as popular as "size of atoms".
From the University of Wisconsin (Steven's Point) website, via GIS, here is a visual example of some of the class of objects we are talking about understanding here compared to each other in size.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
On Computers**
http://shennessy11.blogspot.com/2011/01/on-computers.html
http://gspotblogspotblogspotblogspotblogspot.blogspot.com/2011/01/on-computers.html
I'm taking the very great liberty of focusing this blog post on Aristotle**'s opinion on the philosophical question of whether computers are alive or not rather than the mechanisms by which vapors cause three of the four elements to form different sorts of plants and computers in differing climates. Although, before that I will state that I did find Aristotle**'s scientific assumptions very interesting. I always did like a little history.
I want to note that I've never put very much stock into that sort of question. When asking "Is a computer alive?" I'm almost certainly not going to learn any new, relevant information about what a computer is or to what role in the world the computer belongs. Rather, all the participants are going to understand with a reasonably high degree of accuracy exactly what a computer is going into the discussion, and spend a non-trivial amount of time and energy debating the semantics of "life". Not a particularly useful topic as it isn't generally going to lead to greater clarity of communication in the future.
The definition of life Aristotle** uses in On Plants, however, is somewhat different than our modern one and more interesting to write about, certainly. Apparently, plants can't be completely alive because they lack locomotion, although they must be at least partially alive since they take in both moist and solid food, among other factors. Not breathing and not sleeping are strikes against them, although there appears to be some confusion as to whether the plants posses sexes. At any rate, we certainly are led by Aristotle** to the conclusion that plants are partially alive. I feel that most computers would fall into that category as well, at least if one were convinced electricity was analogous to food.
Someone could probably fill all the criteria listed (frustratingly, I am missing a page early). It would be possible, I'm sure to design a computer that ran on something that clearly qualified as "food", could move, respire, and have inactive periods during recharge cycles. Since strong vs weak AI type distinctions don't seem to be relevant here, the focus being entirely on what a thing does to determine what it is, rather than trying to derive the latter directly, if it acts alive it is likely alive in the opinion of Aristotle**.
http://gspotblogspotblogspotblogspotblogspot.blogspot.com/2011/01/on-computers.html
I'm taking the very great liberty of focusing this blog post on Aristotle**'s opinion on the philosophical question of whether computers are alive or not rather than the mechanisms by which vapors cause three of the four elements to form different sorts of plants and computers in differing climates. Although, before that I will state that I did find Aristotle**'s scientific assumptions very interesting. I always did like a little history.
I want to note that I've never put very much stock into that sort of question. When asking "Is a computer alive?" I'm almost certainly not going to learn any new, relevant information about what a computer is or to what role in the world the computer belongs. Rather, all the participants are going to understand with a reasonably high degree of accuracy exactly what a computer is going into the discussion, and spend a non-trivial amount of time and energy debating the semantics of "life". Not a particularly useful topic as it isn't generally going to lead to greater clarity of communication in the future.
The definition of life Aristotle** uses in On Plants, however, is somewhat different than our modern one and more interesting to write about, certainly. Apparently, plants can't be completely alive because they lack locomotion, although they must be at least partially alive since they take in both moist and solid food, among other factors. Not breathing and not sleeping are strikes against them, although there appears to be some confusion as to whether the plants posses sexes. At any rate, we certainly are led by Aristotle** to the conclusion that plants are partially alive. I feel that most computers would fall into that category as well, at least if one were convinced electricity was analogous to food.
Someone could probably fill all the criteria listed (frustratingly, I am missing a page early). It would be possible, I'm sure to design a computer that ran on something that clearly qualified as "food", could move, respire, and have inactive periods during recharge cycles. Since strong vs weak AI type distinctions don't seem to be relevant here, the focus being entirely on what a thing does to determine what it is, rather than trying to derive the latter directly, if it acts alive it is likely alive in the opinion of Aristotle**.
Pictured: Alive.
Source: Wikipedia.
Note: The notation ** follows that of the book, and accordingly Aristotle** is the author of the piece, even though we all know he wasn't Aristotle.
Reading #??, The Chinese Room Question
Comments:
http://chiblog.sjmorrow.com/2011/01/reading-2-chinese-room.html
http://shennessy11.blogspot.com/2011/01/chinese-room.html
I presume a reference section is not required for this post.
The Chinese Room Question is a philosophical assertion with respect to the AI field. The assertion is that an individual who knows no Chinese characters sitting inside a closed room (a set up similar to the Turing test, which I presume the reader to be familiar with) manually executing a computer program using cards to reply to inputs that are likewise Chinese characters printed on cards. The individual is then able to converse in Chinese without actually understanding the language. The argument is that this proves the impossibility of "strong AI"; that is, the argument says that this scenario demonstrates that a computer can never be built into a true mind, but only a simulation of one.
While I actually tend to concur with the conclusion, I disagree that the Chinese Room demonstrates it. The Chinese room does not prove that the individual does not understand Chinese any more than it would prove that he does. From the perspective of an outside observer feeding in cards, the output would of course still be correct if the operator did know Chinese.
What the Chinese room does succeed in doing is demonstrating the Turing Test is not adequate to demonstrate strong AI. This is accomplished by showing that that thought experiment, viewed in the perspective of a test for intelligence, can be fooled by an a "program" that does not actually understand the inputs but rather only simulates it.
http://chiblog.sjmorrow.com/2011/01/reading-2-chinese-room.html
http://shennessy11.blogspot.com/2011/01/chinese-room.html
I presume a reference section is not required for this post.
The Chinese Room Question is a philosophical assertion with respect to the AI field. The assertion is that an individual who knows no Chinese characters sitting inside a closed room (a set up similar to the Turing test, which I presume the reader to be familiar with) manually executing a computer program using cards to reply to inputs that are likewise Chinese characters printed on cards. The individual is then able to converse in Chinese without actually understanding the language. The argument is that this proves the impossibility of "strong AI"; that is, the argument says that this scenario demonstrates that a computer can never be built into a true mind, but only a simulation of one.
While I actually tend to concur with the conclusion, I disagree that the Chinese Room demonstrates it. The Chinese room does not prove that the individual does not understand Chinese any more than it would prove that he does. From the perspective of an outside observer feeding in cards, the output would of course still be correct if the operator did know Chinese.
What the Chinese room does succeed in doing is demonstrating the Turing Test is not adequate to demonstrate strong AI. This is accomplished by showing that that thought experiment, viewed in the perspective of a test for intelligence, can be fooled by an a "program" that does not actually understand the inputs but rather only simulates it.
From the website of Glasgow University's Philosophy department, via GIS
Reading #41: LiquidText, Active Reading through Multitouch Document Manipulation
http://ebo-chi.blogspot.com/2011/01/conference-paper-1-sequential-art-for.html
http://chi2010-cskach.blogspot.com/2011/01/reading-1-rolling-and-shooting-two.html
Paper Title: LiquidText, Active Reading through Multitouch Document Manipulation
Author: Craig Tashman
Venue: The origin of the dissertation is the CHI 2010 Doctoral Consortium in Atlanta, Georgia which met 10-15 April, 2010.
Summary: Mr. Tashman makes an argument that paper is a "poor active reading* medium" and that therefore efforts to emulate paper in electronic readers are therefore misguided. He then discusses his efforts towards an active reading medium that is not poor, called LiquidText. He gives a brief overview of the current state of his work, the objectives of an active reading medium, and further intended directions of research. This would initially involve more detailed understanding of the process of active reading, which would contribute to the advancement of HCI and further improvements to LiquidText.
Discussion: The most interesting aspect of the paper is speculation into the future of reading. I have never encountered the assertion that paper is a poor mechanism for reading in any form before, and that's what really grabbed my attention in this paper. I think I can see his point with respect to information retrieval although he and I may be working from slightly different definitions of reading, which I feel is suggested by his definition of active reading.
The primary fault of his work is that same assertion. I don't think it is fair to characterize paper as poor in any respect for reading, when it is clearly superior to any alternative format that hasn't appeared within the last fifteen years. Certainly paper is not sacred, but "poor" takes it too far. Unfortunately, I do not feel sufficiently informed to comment on the merits of LiquidText itself, since the dissertation focused on the implementation of research rather than LiquidText.
The next move I would make in his position that he has not already outlined in the paper would be to attempt to remove the backlighting from LiquidText, at least when (if?) it is implemented as an independent reader rather than software. That would, in my opinion, eliminate the biggest weakness relative to paper for prolonged reading. Most of the outlined steps are also positive.
*Quoting his introduction: "Reading is not passive. For many knowledge workers, reading often entails annotation, information extraction, outlining, and complex navigation tasks. This type of reading is known as ‘active reading,’ and is a frequent occurrence for a wide range of knowledge workers." Just in case any of my readers want to know what "active reading" is defined as.
http://chi2010-cskach.blogspot.com/2011/01/reading-1-rolling-and-shooting-two.html
Paper Title: LiquidText, Active Reading through Multitouch Document Manipulation
Author: Craig Tashman
(Source: Georgia Tech website, vis GIS)
Venue: The origin of the dissertation is the CHI 2010 Doctoral Consortium in Atlanta, Georgia which met 10-15 April, 2010.
Summary: Mr. Tashman makes an argument that paper is a "poor active reading* medium" and that therefore efforts to emulate paper in electronic readers are therefore misguided. He then discusses his efforts towards an active reading medium that is not poor, called LiquidText. He gives a brief overview of the current state of his work, the objectives of an active reading medium, and further intended directions of research. This would initially involve more detailed understanding of the process of active reading, which would contribute to the advancement of HCI and further improvements to LiquidText.
Discussion: The most interesting aspect of the paper is speculation into the future of reading. I have never encountered the assertion that paper is a poor mechanism for reading in any form before, and that's what really grabbed my attention in this paper. I think I can see his point with respect to information retrieval although he and I may be working from slightly different definitions of reading, which I feel is suggested by his definition of active reading.
The primary fault of his work is that same assertion. I don't think it is fair to characterize paper as poor in any respect for reading, when it is clearly superior to any alternative format that hasn't appeared within the last fifteen years. Certainly paper is not sacred, but "poor" takes it too far. Unfortunately, I do not feel sufficiently informed to comment on the merits of LiquidText itself, since the dissertation focused on the implementation of research rather than LiquidText.
The next move I would make in his position that he has not already outlined in the paper would be to attempt to remove the backlighting from LiquidText, at least when (if?) it is implemented as an independent reader rather than software. That would, in my opinion, eliminate the biggest weakness relative to paper for prolonged reading. Most of the outlined steps are also positive.
*Quoting his introduction: "Reading is not passive. For many knowledge workers, reading often entails annotation, information extraction, outlining, and complex navigation tasks. This type of reading is known as ‘active reading,’ and is a frequent occurrence for a wide range of knowledge workers." Just in case any of my readers want to know what "active reading" is defined as.
Microblog #2, "Coming of Age in Samoa, Introduction"
Summary: The introduction is what you would expect. The author lays out what she perceives as a problem (extant attitudes about adolescence not having a proper scientific basis), what she is going to do to attempt to correct the problem, and why she chose Samoa to do it.
Discussion: The most interesting item I have to note is that after rejecting the idea of simply taking 500 children from large American and 500 small ones because she can't be sure what factors are at work besides size, she states she is comfortable with generalizing from three Samoan villages to fifty due to the 'uniformity and simplicity' of the culture. That strikes me as reaching a little bit.
Discussion: The most interesting item I have to note is that after rejecting the idea of simply taking 500 children from large American and 500 small ones because she can't be sure what factors are at work besides size, she states she is comfortable with generalizing from three Samoan villages to fifty due to the 'uniformity and simplicity' of the culture. That strikes me as reaching a little bit.
Microblog #1, "Design of Everyday Things, Chapter 1"
Summary: The author spends this chapter discussing what he believes to be unnecessary complexity in everyday items. Examples used ranged from telephones to refrigerators to cars to doors. Elements cited as contributing to positive design prominently feature functionality easily deduced visually.
Discussion: The author makes a good point; many devices I am around everyday have functions I either don't know how to or don't care to use. I did note a couple things I think to be relevant. First, I think that a lot of design complexity comes from the designers assuming that the user either has or can easily acquire some degree of their proficiency with the device, and either fail to realize just how much they know, or overestimate the amount of time users are willing to invest in learning the system. Second, I think in many cases there are many functions that the majority of users simply wouldn't care to use that may be contributing to the situation without being really unintuitive.
Discussion: The author makes a good point; many devices I am around everyday have functions I either don't know how to or don't care to use. I did note a couple things I think to be relevant. First, I think that a lot of design complexity comes from the designers assuming that the user either has or can easily acquire some degree of their proficiency with the device, and either fail to realize just how much they know, or overestimate the amount of time users are willing to invest in learning the system. Second, I think in many cases there are many functions that the majority of users simply wouldn't care to use that may be contributing to the situation without being really unintuitive.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
Blog Post #0, Introduction
Joshua I. Penick '10
fattoad@neo.tamu.edu
5th year Senior
In all seriousness, I'm taking this class because I saw a year old poster of 436 students and recognized I guy I know who had a talent for picking classes. Probably would have wound up in here anyway, it's in my primary track and seemed a logical next step after 420.
My computer science experience consists of the lower level courses everyone takes, plus the aforementioned AI class, 463 (probably not relevant), and 431 (definitely not relevant).
Ten years from now I plan to be in Colorado. Everything else is speculation, since I don't have a job lined up (yet).
I understand from Dr. Klappenecker that quantum computing wrecking the current cryptography paradigm is as good a bet as any for the next big advance.
To answer the question you meant to ask with the time machine, George Washington.
I'm a fan of the handlebar mustache. Been wearing it long enough.
If I could learn one foreign language fluently overnight, it would be German. Be nice to be able to understand all those old war movies.
Fun fact: I was homeschooled for 11 1/2 years.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)