Doktorandenkolleg

Willkommen zum VIS(US) Doktorandenkolleg!

Das Institut für Visualisierung und Interaktive Systeme (VIS) lädt Doktorandinnen und Doktoranden zum wissenschaftlichen Austausch und zur Information über Perspektiven nach der Promotion in Wirtschaft und Wissenschaft im Rahmen des Doktorandenkollegs 2012 ein.

Wann? 06.-08. Februar 2012
Wo? Waldhotel Zollernblick, Freudenstadt
Wer? Doktorandinnen und Doktoranden des VIS(US)
Leitung: Tom Ertl, Martin Fuchs, Albrecht Schmidt, Daniel Weiskopf
Institut für Visualisierung und Interaktive Systeme (VIS)
Visualisierungsinstitut der Universität Stuttgart

 

 

Vorläufiges Programm 

Tag 1 –   6. Februar 2012
Skifahren bei genügend Schnee (=Urlaubstag 😉 )
Anreise nach Freudenstadt (Organisation nach Absprache)
18 Uhr Gemeinsames Abendessen
20 Uhr

20:30

Prof. Dr. Rul Gunzenhäuser:
Thesen und Prognosen aus dem Bereich der Informatik

Albrecht Schmidt: „die Welt in 100 Jahre“
– Rückblick auf ein Buch von Wissenschaftlern von 1910 –
Wir entwickeln von Szenarien für die nächsten 100 Jahre

Tag 2   7. Februar 2012
08:45 Einführung/Eröffnung
09:00 Vortrag: Andrés Bruhn
Vorstellung des Arbeitsgebiets und der neuen Arbeitsgruppe
10:00 „FastForward“ Poster – Session 1
Kurzpräsentation (Elevator-Talk) – 90 Sekunden (strikt!) pro Person
20 Präsentation thematisch bunt gemischt
Ziel: Dissertationsthema und Arbeitsgebiet allgemeinverständlich für Informatiker erklären und auf das eigene Poster neugierig machen
10:30 – 11:30 Kaffeepause, Posterausstellung und Gespräche an den Postern
11:30 – 12:30 Track A: Session 1
3 Vorträge @ 10 Minuten
Track B: Session 1
3 Vorträge @ 10 Minuten
Track C: Session 1
3 Vorträge @ 10 Minuten
12:30 – 14:00 Mittagessen
14:00 – 15:00 Track A: Session 2
3 Vorträge @ 10 Minuten
Track B: Session 2
3 Vorträge @ 10 Minuten
Track C: Session 2
3 Vorträge @ 10 Minuten
15:30 – 16:00 „FastForward“ Poster – Session 2
Kurzpräsentation (Elevator-Talk) – 90 Sekunden (strikt!) pro Person
20 Präsentation thematisch bunt gemischt
Ziel: Dissertationsthema und Arbeitsgebiet allgemeinverständlich für Informatiker erklären und auf das eigene Poster neugierig machen
16:00 – 17:00 Kaffeepause, Posterausstellung und Gespräche an den Postern
17:00 – 18:00 Frei 🙂
18 Uhr Gemeinsames Abendessen
20 Uhr Informatik Studieren – Was macht es attraktiv?
Wie sollten wir unsere Studiengänge gestalten?
Wie gewinnen wir die besten Studierenden?
Diskussion und Gruppenarbeit
Tag 3   8. Februar 2012
08:30 – 10:30 Karrierewege nach der Promotion

  • Profile und Anforderungen
  • Akademische Karriere im Ausland (z.B. USA, UK)
  • Consulting
  • Entwickler (z.B. Google)
  • Management
  • Professor an einer (Fach)-Hochschule
  • Professor an einer Uni
  • Unternehmensgründung
  • Wissenschaftler in einem Forschungslabor

Diskussion ?

10:30 – 11:00 Kaffeepause
11:00 – 12:00 Track A: Session 3
2 Vorträge @ 10 Minuten
Diskussion
Publikationsstrategie
Track B: Session 3
2 Vorträge @ 10 Minuten
Diskussion
Publikationsstrategie
Track C: Session 3
2 Vorträge @ 10 Minuten
Diskussion
Publikationsstrategie
12:00 Mittagessen
Abreise, Rückfahrt nach Stuttgart
Evtl. Skifahren (bei Schnee und Interesse…)

Einreichung von Beiträgen

Ab sofort: Anmeldung per E-Mail an anja.mebus@vis.uni-stuttgart.de (Betreff: “DOKO-2012”, bitte Anschrift, Arbeitstitel des Promotionsvorhabens und Betreuerin oder Betreuer der Promotion angeben)
bis 24.1.2012: Einreichung einer Kurzfassung des Beitrags zum Doktorandenkolleg
(max. 1 Seite, unter Beachtung der folgenden Hinweise)
Hinweis: Für die Teilnahme am Doktorandenkolleg stehen nur begrenzt Plätze zur Verfügung. Sollte die Zahl der Anmeldungen die verfügbaren Kapazitäten überschreiten, entscheiden die Organisatoren über die Annahme von Beiträgen!
bis 2.2.2012: Feedback
bis 5.2.2012: Abgabe der finalen Version des Beitrags

Anmeldung von Beiträgen

Mit dem Doktoranden-Kolloquium möchten wir alle die in VIS und VISUS promovieren motivieren über Ihr Dissertationsthema zu berichten und zu diskutieren. Jede(r) Teilnehmer(in) soll bis zu, 24.1.2012 einen Beitrag im Umfang von ca. 1 Seite (Vorlagen siehe unten) schreiben, der die folgenden Abschnitte enthält:

Problembeschreibung und Forschungsfrage

  • Welches Problem wollt ihr mit euerer Forschung lösen?
  • Warum ist es wichtig dieses Problem zu lösen?
  • Aus welchem Grund sollte jemand für Forschung an dieser Frage bezahlen?
  • Was ist die zentrale Forschungsfrage und was wollt ihr sie konkret herausfinden?
  • Was ist der zu erwartende Wissensgewinn?

Vorgehensweise und Methode

  • Wie führt ihr eure Forschung durch? Ist eure Forschung theoretisch, experimentell oder empirisch?
  • Wie verifizieren oder evaluieren ihr die Ergebnisse?
  • Wie stellt ihr die Richtigkeit und Qualität eurer Ergebnisse sicher?
  • Erkläre kurz die Vorgehensweise und begründe warum diese für deine Forschungsarbeiten angemessen ist. Welche alternativen Vorgehensweisen wären möglich und warum verwendest du diese nicht?
  • Welche Methoden setzt du ein?

Verwandte Arbeiten

  • Was sind die wichtigsten drei Arbeiten anderer Forschungsgruppen auf die sich deine Forschung bezieht?
  • Wie haben diese Arbeiten dich beeinflusst?
  • Was machst du besser als die bisherigen Arbeiten? Wo ergibt sich etwas Neues durch deine Arbeit?

Vorläufige Ergebnisse

  • Was hast du bis jetzt herausgefunden? Beschreibe die vorläufigen Ergebnisse.
  • Aus welchem Grund sollten wir diesen Ergebnissen vertrauen? Wie hast du diese überprüft?
  • Welche weiteren Ergebnisse erwartest du?

Nächste Schritte

  • Was sind die nächsten Schritte in deiner Arbeit? Was fehlt noch damit aus der Arbeit eine Dissertation wird?
  • Wo brauchst du noch weitere (externe) Expertise? An welchen Stellen wären Kooperationen hilfreich?

Formatvorlage und Einreichung
Bitte verwendet die folgende Vorlage für die Einreichung. Bitte schickt den Beitrag als PDF an anja.mebus@vis.uni-stuttgart.de (Betreff: “DOKO-2012-Beitrag”)

Beispiel: PDF
Latex-Vorlage: ZIP-Archiv
MS-Word 97-2003 Vorlage: DOC
MS-Word 2007 Vorlage: DOCX

Auto-UI 2012 in the US, looking for hosts for 2013

The next and 4rd international conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Vehicular Applications (AutoUI 2012) will be in Portsmouth, New Hampshire in the USA. The dates for the conference are 17-19 of October 2012. The first day for workshops and tutorials and 2 days for the main conference. Portsmouth is about an 1 hour drive from Boston and the timing is great (fall foliage – the photos of the colorful forests looked good 😉

The steering committee (sc@auto-ui.org) is inviting proposals for Auto-UI 2013 from the community of researchers in the field. The conference was 2009 in Essen (Germany), 2010 in Pittsburgh (USA), 2011 in Salzburg (Austria), and it will be in 2012 in Portsmouth (USA). Keeping this cycle between Europe and North America 2013 should be in Europe.

Bryan Reimer: Opening keynote at Auto-UI 2011 in Salzburg

Bryan started his keynote talk the automotive user interface conference (auto-ui.org) in Salzburg with reminding us that having controversial discussions about the HMI in the car is not new. Quoting a newspaper article from the 1930s on the introduction of the radio in the car and its impact on the driver he picked an interesting example, that can be seen as the root of many issues we have now with infotainment systems in the car.

The central question he raised is: how to create user interface that fit human users? He made an important point: humans are not “designed” to drive at high speed in complex environments; perception has evolved for walking and running in natural environment. Additionally to the basic limitations of human cognition, there is a great variety of capabilities of drivers, their skills and cognitive ability (e.g. influence of age). A implication of the global change is demographics is that the average capabilities of a drivers will be reduced – basically as many older people will be drivers…

Over the last 100 years cars have changes significantly! Looking more closely Bryan argues that much of the chance happened in the last 10 years. There has been little change from the 1950s to the 1990s with regard to the car user interface.

It is apparent that secondary tasks are becoming more important to the user. Users will interact more while driving because the can. It is however not obvious that they are capable of it.

Even given these developments it is apparent that driving has become safer. Passive safety has been improved massively and this made driving much safer. There seems to be a drawback to this as well, as people may take greater risks as they feel safer. The next step is really to avoid accidence in the first place. Bryan argues that the interaction between driver, environment, and vehicles is very important in that. He suggests that we should make more of an effort to create systems that fit the drivers.

The Yerkes-Dodson Law helps to understand how to design systems that keep peoples attention in the optimal performance. He made an important point: there are certain issues that cannot be solved, e.g. if someone is tired we can do only very little – the driver will need to rest. We should make sure that we take these things into account when designing systems.

Visual distraction is an obvious factor and much discussed in the papers at the conference – but Bryan argued that “eyes on the road” is not equal to “mind on the road”. I think this is really a very important point. Ensuring that people keep their eyes on the road, seeing things is not enough. The big resulting question is how to keep or get people focused on the street and environment. It seems there is some more research to do…

The variety of interfaces and interaction metaphors build into cars opens more choices but at the same time creates problems, as people need to learn and understand them. A simple question such as: How do you switch the car off? may be hard to answer (Bryan had the example of a car with a push button starter, where you cannot remove the key). I think there are simple questions that can be learned from industry and production machines… add an emergency stop button and make it mandatory 😉

If you are interested more about Bryan’s work look at his webpage or his page at the MIT agelab or one of his recent publications [1] in the IEEE Pervasive Computing Magazine’s special issue on automotive computing, see [2] for an introduction to the special issue.

Sorry for the poor quality photos … back row and an iPhone…

[1] Joseph F. Coughlin, Bryan Reimer, and Bruce Mehler. 2011. Monitoring, Managing, and Motivating Driver Safety and Well-Being. IEEE Pervasive Computing 10, 3 (July 2011), 14-21. DOI=10.1109/MPRV.2011.54 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MPRV.2011.54

[2] Albrecht Schmidt, Joseph Paradiso, and Brian Noble. 2011. Automotive Pervasive Computing. IEEE Pervasive Computing 10, 3 (July 2011), 12-13. DOI=10.1109/MPRV.2011.45 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MPRV.2011.45

Automotive UI in Salzburg

Manfred Tscheligi opend the Automotive UI conference in Salzburg. The conference is now in its 3rd year after 2009 in Essen and 2010 in Pittsburgh. The conference is growing – there were well over 130 people registered 🙂

The proceedings of the conference series are online available at http://auto-ui.org

3rd Auto-UI Proceedings 2011 (soon in the ACM DL)
2nd Auto-UI Proceedings 2010 (ACM DL)
1st Auto-UI Proceedings 2009 (ACM DL)

Guests in my multimodal interaction class

Today I had brought 3 more professors with me to teach the class on multimodal interaction (I learned from Hans). As we have the pd-net project meeting Nigel Davies, Marc Langheirich, and Rui Jose were in Stuttgart and ‘volunteered’ to give a talk.

Nigel talked about the work in Lancaster on the use of mobile computing technology to support sustainable travel. He explained the experiments they conducted for collecting and sharing travel related information. In the 6th Sense Transport project they look beyond looking at understanding the current context into predictions and eventually ‘time travel’ 😉

Marc presented a one hour version of his tutorial on privacy introducing the terminology and explaining the many facets this topic has. We discussed the ‘NTHNTF’ argument (Nothing To Hide Nothing To Fear) and Marc used an example of AOLstalker.com to show the weaknesses of this argument. Marc suggested some reading if you want to dive into the topic, see [1,2,3,4].

Rui focused in his lecture on pervasive public displays. He gave an overview of typical architectures for digital signage systems and the resulting limitation. The pd-net approach aims at creating an open platform that allows many different applications and use cased. He showed once concept of using virtual pin-badges to trigger content and to express interest in a certain topic.

There is more information on the pd-net project on http://pd-net.org

[1] David Brin. The Transparent Society. Perseus Publishing, 1999.
[2] Simson Garfinkel: Database Nation – The Death of Privacy in the 21st Century. O’Reilly, 2001.
[3] Lawrence Lessig: Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. Basic Books, 2006. http://codev2.cc/
[4] Waldo, Lin, Millett (eds.): Engaging Privacy and Information Technologygy in a Digital Age. National Academies Press, 2007.

Call for Papers: Symposium on Pervasive Display Networks

Rui José and Elaine Huang are chairing an international symposium on pervasive displays in Portugal. The conference will be held June 4-5 2012 in Porto. The submission deadline for full papers is January 16th, 2012.

With our research in the PD-net project we encounter many interesting research questions and met with many other researchers interested in the topic. It seems that the many real deployments of electronic displays is fueling ideas and makes it obvious that research is required to understand the properties of this new upcoming media. The call states: “As digital displays become pervasive, they become increasingly relevant in many areas, including advertising, art, sociology, engineering, computer science, interaction design, and entertainment.

We hope with this symposium we will bring together researchers and practitioners as well as users to share research results and generate new ideas.

Submissions that report on cutting-edge research in the broad spectrum of pervasive digital displays are invited, ranging from large interactive walls to personal projection, from tablets and mobile phone screens to 3-D displays and tabletops. Topics include:

  • Novel technologies
  • Architecture
  • Applications
  • Domains and formative studies studies
  • Evaluations and deployments
  • Interfaces and interaction techniques
  • Content design

Have a look at the webpage and the call for paper at http://pervasivedisplays.org/cfp.php

Closing Keynote at AMI2011, Beyond Ubicomp – Computing is Changing the Way we Live

On Friday afternoon I had the privilege to present the closing keynote at AMI2011 in Amsterdam with the title ‘Beyond Ubicomp – Computing is Changing the Way we Live’. The conference featured research in Ambient Intelligence ranging from networking and system architecture to interfaces and ethnography. It brought an interesting set of people together and it was good to see many students and young researchers presenting their work.

In my closing keynote at talked about my experience of the last 13 years in this field and about a vision of the future. My vision is based on a basic technology assessment – basically looking what technologies will (in my view) definitely come over the next 20 years and looking at the implications of this. I stared out with a short reference to Mark Weiser’s now 20 year old article [1]. The upcoming issue of IEEE Pervasive Magazine will have a in-depth analysis of the last 20 years since Weiser’ article – we have also an article in there on how interaction evolved.

The vision part of the talk looked “Perception beyond there here and now” [2] from 3 different angles:

  • Paradigm Shift in Communication
    Here I argue that the default communication in the future will be public communication and only if something is secret we will try to use non public channel. First indicators of this are a switch from email to twitter and facebook. I used a cake baking example to highlight the positive points of this shift.
  • Steep Increase in media capture
    The second angle is just observing and extrapolating the increase in capture of media information. If you go already now on youtube you will information about many things (backing a cake, repairing a bike, etc.). The implication of this increase in media capture will be virtually unlimited access to experience other people share
  • Transformation of experienced perception
    The final angle is that this creates a new way of perceiving the world. We will extent perception beyond the here and now and this is bringing a completely new way of creating and accessing information. I used the example of enquiring about buying an international train ticket at the station in Amsterdam. If you can look there through other people’s eyes the question becomes trivial.

My overall argument is that we are in for a major transformation of our knowledge and information culture. I would expect that this shift is as radical as the shift from an oral tradition to the written societies – but the transition will be much quicker and in the context of a globalized and competitive world.

The main conclusion from this is: Ethics and values are the central design material of this century.

Looking at twitter it seems it got across to some in the audience 😉 If your are interested, too have a look at the slides from the keynote.

[1] Mark Weiser. The computer for the 21st century. Scientific American, Vol. 265, No. 3. (1991)
[2] Albrecht Schmidt, Marc Langheinrich, and Kritian Kersting. 2011. Perception beyond the Here and Now. Computer 44, 2 (February 2011), 86-88. DOI=10.1109/MC.2011.54 http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MC.2011.54

Keynote: Steve Benford talking on “Designing Trajectories Through Entertainment Experiences”

On Tuesday morning Steve Benford presented the entertainment interfaces keynote. He is interested in how to use computer technology to support performances. Steve works a lot with artist group, where the University is involved in implementing, running and studying the experiences. The studies are typically done by means of ethnography. The goal of this research is to uncover the basic mechanisms that make these performances work and potentially transfer the findings to human computer interaction in more general.

I particularly liked the example of “Day of the figurines“. Steve showed the video of experiences they created and discussed the observations and findings in detail. He related this work to the notion of trajectories [1], [2]. He made the point that historic trajectory are especially well suited to support spectators.

Some years back I worked with Steve in the Equator and we even have a jointed publication [3] 🙂 When looking for these references I came across another interesting paper – related to thrill and excitement, which he discussed in the final part of the talk [4].

PS: we had a great party on Monday night but the attendance was extremly good 🙂

[1] Benford, S. and Giannachi, G. 2008. Temporal trajectories in shared interactive narratives. In Proceeding of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Florence, Italy, April 05 – 10, 2008). CHI ’08. ACM, New York, NY, 73-82. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1357054.1357067

[2] Benford, S., Giannachi, G., Koleva, B., and Rodden, T. 2009. From interaction to trajectories: designing coherent journeys through user experiences. In Proceedings of the 27th international Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Boston, MA, USA, April 04 – 09, 2009). CHI ’09. ACM, New York, NY, 709-718. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1518701.1518812

[3] Benford, S., Schnädelbach, H., Koleva, B., Anastasi, R., Greenhalgh, C., Rodden, T., Green, J., Ghali, A., Pridmore, T., Gaver, B., Boucher, A., Walker, B., Pennington, S., Schmidt, A., Gellersen, H., and Steed, A. 2005. Expected, sensed, and desired: A framework for designing sensing-based interaction. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 12, 1 (Mar. 2005), 3-30. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1057237.1057239

[4] Schnädelbach, H., Rennick Egglestone, S., Reeves, S., Benford, S., Walker, B., and Wright, M. 2008. Performing thrill: designing telemetry systems and spectator interfaces for amusement rides. In Proceeding of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Florence, Italy, April 05 – 10, 2008). CHI ’08. ACM, New York, NY, 1167-1176. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1357054.1357238

Opening Keynote of Mensch&Computer 2010 by Ed H. Chi

Ed H. Chi from PARC presented the opening keynote for Mensch&Computer 2010. In the motivation of the talk he showed a document on “Applied Information processing psychology” from 1971 – probably very few had seen this before. It makes an argument for an experimental science that is related to augmented cognition. The basic idea is very similar to Vannevar Bush’s Memex – to extend the human cognitive power by machines (and especially computer technology). It is apparent that these ideas became the backdrop of the many innovations that happened at PARC in the early days.

Ed stressed that there is still a lot of potential for the application of psychological phenomena and models to human computer interaction research. As an example he used the idea that speech output in a navigation system could use your name in an important situation making use of the attenuation theory of attention (the cocktail party effect). By hearing your name you are more likely to listen – even if you are yourself in a conversation. The effect may be stronger if the voice is your mother’s voice 😉

The main part of the talk centered on model driven research in HCI. Using the ScentHighlights [1] examples he outlined the process. I liked very much the broad view Ed has on models and the various uses of models he suggested, e.g. generative models that generate ideas; or behavioral models that lead to additional functionalities (as example he used: people are sharing search results in google, hence sharing should be a basic function in a search tool). Taking the example of Wikipedia he showed how models can be used to predict interaction and growth. I found the question on the growth of knowledge very exciting. I think it is defiantly not finite 😉 otherwise research is a bad career choice. Looking at the Wikipedia example it is easy to imagine that the carrying capacity is a linear function and hence one could use a predictive function where a logistic growth curve is overlayed with a linear function.

Random link from the talk: http://mrtaggy.com/

Ed discussed yahoo’s social pattern library:
http://developer.yahoo.com/ypatterns/social/people/reputation/
This pattern library is pretty interesting. I found the reputation pattern pretty comprehensive. It seems that this library is now comprehensive enough for using it for real and in teaching.

[1] Chi, E. H., Hong, L., Gumbrecht, M., and Card, S. K. 2005. ScentHighlights: highlighting conceptually-related sentences during reading. In Proceedings of the 10th international Conference on intelligent User interfaces (San Diego, California, USA, January 10 – 13, 2005). IUI ’05. ACM, New York, NY, 272-274. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1040830.1040895