%Tactile: Pertaining to the cutaneous sense but more specifically the sensation of pressure rather than temperature or pain.
%Force Feedback: Relating to the mechanical production of information sensed by the human kinesthetic system.
-\cite{maclean09}
+%\cite{maclean09}
% Hence, haptics is generally not the primary focus for the design of user interfaces.
\begin{figure}[!b]
\definecolor{cellred}{rgb} {0.98,0.17,0.15}
-\definecolor{virt}{rgb} {0.17,0.60,0.99}
+\definecolor{virt}{rgb} {0.98,0.17,0.15}
\definecolor{cellblue}{rgb} {0.17,0.60,0.99}
\newcommand{\actuator}[3]{\node[x=1mm,y=1mm, fill=#3, text=white, circle, minimum size=1cm] at (#1) {#2};}
\newcommand{\vibrdot}[2]{\node[x=1mm,y=1mm, fill=#2, circle, minimum size=1mm] at (#1) {};}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[x=1mm,y=1mm, dotted] (0,20) grid (80,30);
- \actuator{0,25}{a}{cellred}
- \actuator{80,25}{b}{cellred}
+ \actuator{0,25}{a}{cellblue}
+ \actuator{80,25}{b}{cellblue}
\actuator{20,25}{v}{virt}
\draw[x=1mm,y=1mm, <->]
(0,15) -- (0,0) -- (85,0) node [below] {$pos.$};
(0,0) -- (80,10);
\node[x=1mm,y=1mm, anchor=south, rotate=90] () at (0,13){$amp.$};
\draw[x=1mm,y=1mm, thick, draw=cellred]
- (20,0) -- (20,7.5) -- (0,7.5) node [left] {$A_a$};
- \draw[x=1mm,y=1mm, thick, draw=cellred]
- (20,0) -- (20,2.5) -- (0,2.5) node [left] {$A_b$};
+ (20,0) -- (20,7.5);
+ \draw[x=1mm,y=1mm, thick, draw=cellblue]
+ (20,7.5) -- (0,7.5) node [left] {$A_a$};
+ \draw[x=1mm,y=1mm, thick, draw=cellblue]
+ (20,2.5) -- (0,2.5) node [left] {$A_b$};
\node[x=1mm,y=1mm, anchor=center] () at (40,-5){Funneling or Phantom illusion};
\foreach \x in {0,...,8} {
\pgfmathtruncatemacro{\y}{18 + floor(\x / 3) * 4}
- \vibrdot{96 + \x * 8, \y}{cellred}
+ \vibrdot{96 + \x * 8, \y}{cellblue}
}
\draw[x=1mm,y=1mm, step=8, dotted] (96,0) grid (160,8);
%In my opinion, sytems are not a computing core with an interface to feed inputs and display outputs.
%I rather
-Interactive systems are made of \defword{interaction techniques}, which are combinations of a device (part of the electro-machanical system) and an interactive language (part of the software controller)~\cite{nigay95}.
+\subsection{Output vocabulary}
+
+On a practical point of view, when a new haptic technology emerges, their designers need information about their specifications: the size of actuators, voltage, required amplitude, resonant frequency, maximum force (continuous and peak), etc.
+They often simulate the behavior of their actuators, and evaluate the relation between the command and the physical effect~\cite{poncet17,poncet16}.
+However, they need to know the desired parameters and values of the physical effects they can produce in order to propose a suitable output vocabulary .
+Therefore we perform iterations of prototyping and evaluation of human factors in order to understand these requirements, and design \defword{interaction techniques}.
+%Interactive systems are made of \defword{interaction techniques}, which
+Interaction techniques are combinations of a device (part of the electro-machanical system) and an interactive language (part of the software controller)~\cite{nigay95}.
%Users interact with \fixme{digital} systems with \defword{interaction techniques}, which are combinations of a device (part of the electro-machanical system) and an interactive language (part of the software controller)~\cite{nigay95}.
%Devices are usually computer peripherals, we presented some of them previously.
We presented technologies for haptic devices above.
Interactive languages are systematic descriptions of the inputs and outputs of an interactive device.
Similar to programming languages, they have three levels: lexical, syntactic, and semantic.
+\begin{figure}[b]
+ \begin{tikzpicture}
+ %\draw[loosely dotted] (0,-1) grid (17,1);
+ \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, ultra thick]
+ (0,0) sin (1,10) cos (2,0) sin (3,-10) cos
+ (4,0) sin (5,10) cos (6,0) sin (7,-10) cos
+ (8,0) sin (9,10) cos (10,0) sin (11,-10) cos
+ (12,0);
+ \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, xshift=15mm, ultra thick]
+ (0,0) sin (3,10) cos (6,0) sin (9,-10) cos
+ (12,0) sin (15,10) cos (18,0) sin (21,-10) cos
+ (24,0);
+ \node[x=1mm,y=1mm, anchor=center] () at (20,-9){Frequency};
+
+ \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, xshift=55mm, ultra thick]
+ (0,0) sin (1,10) cos (2,0) sin (3,-10) cos
+ (4,0) sin (5,10) cos (6,0) sin (7,-10) cos
+ (8,0) sin (9,10) cos (10,0) sin (11,-10) cos
+ (12,0);
+ \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, ultra thick]
+ (70,0) sin (71,5) cos (72,0) sin (73,-5) cos (74,0) sin (75,5) cos (76,0) sin (77,-5) cos (78,0) sin (79,5) cos (80,0) sin (81,-5) cos (82,0);
+ \node[x=1mm,y=1mm, anchor=center] () at (68,-9){Amplitude};
+
+ \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, ultra thick]
+ (99,0) sin (100,10) cos (101,0) sin (102,-10) cos (103,0) sin (104,10) cos (105,0) sin (106,-10) cos (107,0);
+ \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, ultra thick]
+ (110,0) sin (111,10) cos (112,0) sin (113,-10) cos (114,0) sin (115,10) cos (116,0) sin (117,-10) cos (118,0) sin (119,10) cos (120,0) sin (121,-10) cos (122,0) sin (123,10) cos (124,0) sin (125,-10) cos (126,0);
+ \node[x=1mm,y=1mm, anchor=center] () at (112,-9){Duration};
+
+ \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, xshift=140mm, ultra thick]
+ (0,0) sin (1,10) cos (2,0) sin (3,-10) cos
+ (4,0) sin (5,10) cos (6,0) sin (7,-10) cos
+ (8,0) sin (9,10) cos (10,0) sin (11,-10) cos
+ (12,0);
+ \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, xshift=155mm, ultra thick]
+ (0,0) -- (0,10) -- (2,10) -- (2,-10) --
+ (4,-10) -- (4,10) -- (6,10) -- (6,-10) --
+ (8,-10) -- (8,10) -- (10,10) -- (10,-10) --
+ (12,-10) -- (12,0);
+ \node[x=1mm,y=1mm, anchor=center] () at (153,-9){Shape};
+ \end{tikzpicture}
+ \caption{Four parameters of the vibrotactile output vocabulary: frequency, amplitude, duration and shape.}
+ \label{fig:lexical}
+ \end{figure}
+
The \emph{lexical level} defines the basic vocabulary of the device.
For example, we can control vibrations in frequency, amplitude, shape, and duration (Figure~\ref{fig:lexical}).
Hence the command for a vibrotactile actuator is an electrical signal made of these elements.
%Hence, a software controller sends three values to the electro-mechanical system, which will convert it to forces.
%Such devices also have an input vocabulary, typically 3DOF or 6DOF (translations + rotations) and sometimes one or several buttons.
-\begin{figure}[htb]
-\begin{tikzpicture}
- %\draw[loosely dotted] (0,-1) grid (17,1);
- \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, ultra thick]
- (0,0) sin (1,10) cos (2,0) sin (3,-10) cos
- (4,0) sin (5,10) cos (6,0) sin (7,-10) cos
- (8,0) sin (9,10) cos (10,0) sin (11,-10) cos
- (12,0);
- \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, xshift=15mm, ultra thick]
- (0,0) sin (3,10) cos (6,0) sin (9,-10) cos
- (12,0) sin (15,10) cos (18,0) sin (21,-10) cos
- (24,0);
- \node[x=1mm,y=1mm, anchor=center] () at (20,-9){Frequency};
-
- \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, xshift=55mm, ultra thick]
- (0,0) sin (1,10) cos (2,0) sin (3,-10) cos
- (4,0) sin (5,10) cos (6,0) sin (7,-10) cos
- (8,0) sin (9,10) cos (10,0) sin (11,-10) cos
- (12,0);
- \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, ultra thick]
- (70,0) sin (71,5) cos (72,0) sin (73,-5) cos (74,0) sin (75,5) cos (76,0) sin (77,-5) cos (78,0) sin (79,5) cos (80,0) sin (81,-5) cos (82,0);
- \node[x=1mm,y=1mm, anchor=center] () at (68,-9){Amplitude};
-
- \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, ultra thick]
- (99,0) sin (100,10) cos (101,0) sin (102,-10) cos (103,0) sin (104,10) cos (105,0) sin (106,-10) cos (107,0);
- \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, ultra thick]
- (110,0) sin (111,10) cos (112,0) sin (113,-10) cos (114,0) sin (115,10) cos (116,0) sin (117,-10) cos (118,0) sin (119,10) cos (120,0) sin (121,-10) cos (122,0) sin (123,10) cos (124,0) sin (125,-10) cos (126,0);
- \node[x=1mm,y=1mm, anchor=center] () at (112,-9){Duration};
-
- \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, xshift=140mm, ultra thick]
- (0,0) sin (1,10) cos (2,0) sin (3,-10) cos
- (4,0) sin (5,10) cos (6,0) sin (7,-10) cos
- (8,0) sin (9,10) cos (10,0) sin (11,-10) cos
- (12,0);
- \draw[x=1mm,y=0.5mm, xshift=155mm, ultra thick]
- (0,0) -- (0,10) -- (2,10) -- (2,-10) --
- (4,-10) -- (4,10) -- (6,10) -- (6,-10) --
- (8,-10) -- (8,10) -- (10,10) -- (10,-10) --
- (12,-10) -- (12,0);
- \node[x=1mm,y=1mm, anchor=center] () at (153,-9){Shape};
-\end{tikzpicture}
-\caption{Four parameters of the vibrotactile output vocabulary: frequency, amplitude, duration and shape.}
-\label{fig:lexical}
-\end{figure}
-
The \emph{syntactic level} combines lexical items to form haptic phrases.
They eventually combine different modalities.
%, into higher level representations.
\end{figure}
The \emph{semantic level} represents the mapping between the haptic effect and its associated meaning.
-For example, if we create Tactons for messaging system alerts, we can encode the caller ID with a rhythm, and the urgency with roughness.
+For example, if we create Tactons for meeting alerts, we can encode the kind of meeting with a rhythm, the importance with roughness, and the delay with spatial location.
The combination of both parameters enables encoding every level of urgency for every caller ID.
-Figure~\ref{fig:semantic} shows an example of mapping between multi-parameters Tactons and hierarchical information.
-Some studies associate information to Tactons while evaluating the syntactic level~\cite{brown06,hoggan07}.
-Therefore these studies either assume that the interpretation of the mapping is trivial, or they cannot make the distinction of the part of the metrics associated to the syntactic and the semantic level.
-Some Tactons studies I conducted during my Ph.D. also combined the syntactic and semantic level~\cite{pietrzak06, pietrzak09}.
-The Tactons parameters I used were mapped to direction and distance.
-However the design rationale of these Tactons was to suggest the associated information.
-The directions were coded with lines or L shapes pointing towards the corresponding location.
-Unfortunately we did not evaluate to which extent the semantic helped the interpretetation.
-In section~\ref{sec:activibe}, I will address another issue the semantic level of the haptic vocabulary.
-Most, if not all, haptic devices we use daily such as mobile phones or smartwatches have low quality vibrotactile actuators, and typically only have one.
-In the study I will discuss there we addressed two challenges.
-First, we designed tactons with an off-the-shelf smartatch, which has only one actuator, of poor quality.
-Second, we studied the interpretation of Tactons while users performed their daily activities.
+Figure~\ref{fig:semantic} illustrates this example of mapping between multi-parameters Tactons and hierarchical information.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\draw[<->, stealth-stealth, thick] (l3) -- (d3);
\end{tikzpicture}
- \caption{Illustration of a semantic mapping between 3-parameters tactons and a 3-level information, adapted from~\cite{brown06}. Three values of rhythm are mapped to three types of messages, three values of roughness are mapped to three degrees of importance, and three spatial locations are mapped to three values of delay.}
+ \caption{Illustration of a semantic mapping between 3-parameters Tactons and a 3-level information, adapted from~\cite{brown06}. Three values of rhythm are mapped to three types of messages, three values of roughness are mapped to three degrees of importance, and three spatial locations are mapped to three values of delay.}
\label{fig:semantic}
\end{figure}
-
+
+Some studies about Tacotns associate information to Tactons while evaluating the syntactic level~\cite{brown06,hoggan07}.
+Therefore these studies either assume that the interpretation of the mapping is trivial, or they cannot make the distinction between the part of the metrics associated with the syntactic and the semantic level.
+Some of the Tactons studies I conducted during my Ph.D. also combined the syntactic and semantic level~\cite{pietrzak06, pietrzak09}.
+The Tactons parameters I used were mapped to direction and distance.
+However, the design rationale of these Tactons was to suggest an analogy between the Tacton parameters and the associated information.
+These Tactons used pin-arrays and coded the directions with lines or L shapes pointing towards the corresponding location.
+Unfortunately, we did not evaluate to which extent the semantic helped the interpretation.
+
+In section~\ref{sec:activibe}, I will address another issue with the semantic level of the haptic vocabulary.
+Most, if not all, haptic devices we use daily such as mobile phones or smartwatches have low-quality vibrotactile actuators, and typically only have one.
+In the study I will discuss there we addressed two challenges.
+First, we designed Tactons with an off-the-shelf smartwatch, which has only one actuator, of poor quality.
+Second, we studied the interpretation of Tactons while users performed their daily activities.
+
+\subsection{Engineering and evaluation of haptic devices}
%One may think that because we are computer scientists, we only have to design and implement interaction techniques at the software controller level.
%However, this design not only depends on technological factors (the electro-mechanical system), but also human factors (both sensory and cognitive systems).
Not only the design of interaction techniques depends on technological factors (the electro-mechanical system), but it also depends on human factors (both sensory and cognitive systems).
-The expansion of the haptic interactive vocabulary goes in both direction.
-On one hand, the diversity of haptic sensations and body parts that sense them motivate the design of a large diversity of haptic devices.
+The expansion of the haptic interactive vocabulary goes in both directions.
+On the one hand, the diversity of haptic sensations and body parts that sense them~\cite{lederman87} motivate the design of a large diversity of haptic devices~\cite{seifi19}.
On the other hand, the frequent emergence of new haptic technologies expands the diversity of haptic sensations we leverage for the design of interaction techniques.
This diversity of sensations and technologies is a richness, but also a limitation for the development and integration of haptic sytems.
-Indeed, the sense of touch combines of all these sensations, but no single haptic technology can produce all of them.
-Therefore interactive systems that leverage the sense of touch focus on a subset of haptic sensations relevant to their context of use.
-
-On a practical point of view, when a new haptic technology emerges, their designers need information about their specifications: the size of actuators, voltage, required amplitude, resonant frequency, maximum force (continuous and peak), etc.
-They often simulate the behavior of their actuators, and evaluate the relation between the command and the physical effect~\cite{poncet17,poncet16}.
-However, they need to know the desired parameters and values of the physical effects they can produce in order to propose a suitable output vocabulary that we can use to design interaction techniques.
-Therefore we perform iterations of prototyping and evaluation of human factors in order to understand these requirements.
+Indeed, the sense of touch combines all these sensations, but no single haptic technology can produce all of them.
+Therefore, interactive systems which leverage the sense of touch only focus on the subset of haptic sensations relevant to their context of use.
+This means that the same type of research must be conducted for every new haptic technology.
+Further, the users' perception highly depends on the implementation, which is affected by many environmental factors such as temperature or moisture.
+The amplitude and randomness of such undesirable effects are generally higher with research prototypes than with commercial products.
+While these difficulty are essentially technical, they are difficult to quantify, and they have a strong effect on the precision, validity and replicability of scientific results.
+In the section~\ref{sec:stimtac}, I will discuss a project in which investigated a way to mitigate this issue with physical objects reproducing a similar effect than the effect produced by a programmable friction haptic device.
%Technical and user issues, evaluation…
% Many places where information can get lost: command resolution, non-linear mechanical effect, bad contact between device and user, effect out of perceptual range, haptic illusions.
- Replicability
+% Replicability
+
+% Home made device, inter-personal differences, random differences
- Home made device, inter-personal differences, random differences
+% Ecological validity
- Ecological validity
+% Co-design of devices: human factors guide the design, and the technical limitations shape the vocabulary
- Co-design of devices: human factors guide the design, and the technical limitations shape the vocabulary
+ Physical properties of objects also give haptic feedback
%\subsection{Towards a haptic semiology}{}
projects / hdr.git / commitdiff