iwaal 2013 - mobile nfc vs touchscreen based interaction: architecture proposal and evaluation
Post on 26-May-2015
236 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 1/38
DeustoTech - Deusto Institute of Technology, University of Deusto
http://www.morelab.deusto.es
December 3, 2013
Mobile NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction: Architecture Proposal and Evaluation
IWAAL 2013
Pablo Curiel, Koldo Zabaleta, Ana B. Lago
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 2/38
Outline
Introduction
State of the Art
The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 3/38
Outline
Introduction
State of the Art
The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 4/38
Advances in ICTs
► Increasing number of electronic devices with noticeable computing capabilities.
Introduction
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 5/38
Advances in ICTs
► Increasing number of electronic devices with noticeable computing capabilities.
► Wide range of advanced services offered.
Introduction
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 6/38
Usability issues
► Yet accessing these services can be troublesome…
Introduction
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 7/38
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 8/38
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 9/38
Outline
Introduction
State of the Art
The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 10/38
Related Projects
► Several studies have used NFC-enabled phones to ease the interaction with them and provide different services.
► Common approach: Each NFC tag identifies a given service that is fired when the tag is read.
► Extensions to it:
►General tags which identify objects and special tags with additional information or services that those objects provide (Riekki et al.).
► User context as additional condition to determine which service to provide (Riekki et al.).
► Tags that identify services and tags that identify arguments for them. (Broll et al.).
State of the Art
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 11/38
Our Proposal
A tag represents an object or concept of the real world, not a particular service. Thus, it is the combination of tags read by a user what
determines the service to be provided.
State of the Art
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 12/38
Outline
Introduction
State of the Art
The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 13/38
The Platform
► Activate the most used services on mobile devices by interacting with NFC tags.
► Client-Server architecture
► Three main components:
► The Model
► The Server
► The Mobile Application
Proposed Solution
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 14/38
The Model
► OWL Ontology where two kinds of elements are modelled.
Proposed Solution
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 15/38
The Model
► OWL Ontology where two kinds of elements are modelled.
► Real world entities to be represented on NFC tags
Proposed Solution
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 16/38
The Model
► OWL Ontology where two kinds of elements are modelled.
► Real world entities to be represented on NFC tags
►Hierarchy
Proposed Solution
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 17/38
The Model
► OWL Ontology where two kinds of elements are modelled.
► Real world entities to be represented on NFC tags
►Hierarchy
► The actions to execute
Proposed Solution
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 18/38
The Model
► OWL Ontology where two kinds of elements are modelled.
► Real world entities to be represented on NFC tags
►Hierarchy
► The actions to execute
►A combination of different number and types of tags
Proposed Solution
SendEmail
hasAttribute min 1 Contact
Contact
EmailTag hasTag exactly 1
EmailTag
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 19/38
The Server
► Checks if the combination of tags read by the user is valid…
► And if so, it determines the action they represent.
► Two steps:
► The Rule Engine
► Consistency Checking
Proposed Solution
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 20/38
The Server – The Rule Engine
► One rule per action or service available.
► Each rule checks if the information of the tags read matches, in principle, to its corresponding action.
► If so, it creates an instance of that action and with the attributes that apply in each case.
Proposed Solution
Rule Engine
Telephone And
Contact instances
Telephone action
with associated Contact
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 21/38
The Server –Consistency Checking
► Once an action with its corresponding attributes is created, its consistency is checked.
► Types of the attributes
► Cardinality of the attributes
Proposed Solution
Semantic Reasoner
Telephone action
with associated Contact
TelephoneCall
Contact
hasAttribute exactly 1 Contact
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 22/38
The Server –Consistency Checking
► Once an action with its corresponding attributes is created, its consistency is checked.
► Types of the attributes
► Cardinality of the attributes
► Consistent Action = Valid Action
Proposed Solution
Semantic Reasoner
Telephone action
with associated Contact
Consistent!
TelephoneCall
Contact
hasAttribute exactly 1 Contact
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 23/38
The Mobile Application – Object Creation
► The representation of the objects in the tags follows the ontological model.
Proposed Solution
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 24/38
The Mobile Application – Object Creation
► The representation of the objects in the tags follows the ontological model.
Proposed Solution
<PlaceTagUri>
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 25/38
<PlaceTagUri> <rdf:type> <lnfc:PlaceTag> . <PlaceTagUri> <lnfc:latitude> “51.513016”^^xsd:double . <PlaceTagUri> <lnfc:longitude> “-0.122337”^^xsd:double .
The Mobile Application – Object Creation
► The representation of the objects in the tags follows the ontological model.
Proposed Solution
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 26/38
The Mobile Application – Action Execution
► When a user reads a combination of tags to execute an action, the URIs written on them are used to retrieve the instance from the triplestore.
► The retrieved instances are sent to the server, which determines the action to execute.
► Finally, the mobile phone provides the service that corresponds according to the action returned by the server.
Proposed Solution
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 27/38
Outline
Introduction
State of the Art
The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 28/38
Evaluation
► Goals
► Validate our proposal
► Compare it to traditional Touchscreen-based interaction
► Hypothesis: Interaction based on NFC is faster and easier for end-users than the touchscreen- based one.
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 29/38
Experiment design
► Subjects executed three different actions, both with NFC and an ad-hoc touchscreen-based GUI.
► See weather forecast (no params)
►Make a phone call to a contact (one param)
► Send an e-mail to two contacts (two params)
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 30/38
NFC-based Interaction
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 31/38
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 32/38
Touchscreen-based Interaction
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 33/38
Experiment steps
► Application explanation
► Live demo
► Training for one subject group
► Subjects executed the actions
► Half of the subjects first with NFC, the other first with touchscreen
► Post-experiment survey
► Age, Gender, Familiarity with NFC/Touchscreen phones/New technologies in general and subjective impressions
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 34/38
► 40 Subjects
► Between 20 and 60 years old
Subject characteristics
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 35/38
► 40 Subjects
► Between 20 and 60 years old
► 30 men and 10 women
► Varied technological skills
Subject characteristics
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 36/38
► 40 Subjects
► Between 20 and 60 years old
► 30 men and 10 women
► Varied technological skills
► 80% owned a touchscreen phone
► 66% familiar with NFC/RFID
► But only 33% had used a NFC-enabled phone
► 15 subjects trained with the application before the experiment
Subject characteristics
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 37/38
► Age and technological skills
►Older subjects took less advantage of their smartphones
Subject characteristics - Dependencies
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 38/38
► Age and technological skills
►Older subjects took less advantage of their smartphones
► Age and phone type
► All subjects under 40 owned a smartphone
Subject characteristics - Dependencies
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 39/38
► Age and technological skills
►Older subjects took less advantage of their smartphones
► Age and phone type
► All subjects under 40 owned a smartphone
► Age and experience with NFC
► None of the older subjects had used a NFC phone before
► Phone type and experience with NFC
►Only one subject with prior experience with a NFC phone owned a non-touchscreen phone
Subject characteristics - Dependencies
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 40/38
Subject impressions
► Nearly all subjects found the NFC-based interaction useful
► 75% of the subjects would use it at least occasionally
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 41/38
Task efficiency
► NFC 0.5 seconds faster on average
► No significant difference between the different actions
► 21 subjects faster with NFC / 19 faster with touchscreen
► Pre-experiment training equal for both interaction approaches
► Subjects with training were 2 seconds faster on average with both technologies.
► No correlation between subjective impressions and task efficiency
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 42/38
Task efficiency (II)
► Significant correlation between task efficiency and subject age
► Specially for touch-based interaction
►630 ms slower per year increase (P < 0.001)
►Weaker for NFC
►333 ms slower per year increase (P < 0.01)
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 43/38
Task efficiency (III)
► Interaction time differences (touchscreen time minus NFC time for each subject and task)
► For each year increase in subject age, they are 300 ms faster with NFC (P ≈ 0.001)
►On average, subjects older than 30 are faster with NFC
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 44/38
Task efficiency (IV)
► Subjects who own a touchscreen-phone are clearly faster with this kind of interaction
► 18 seconds faster on average (P < 0.001)
► While it is not that clear that subjects with previous experience with a NFC phone are faster
► 6 seconds faster on average (P ≈ 0.05)
Evaluation
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 45/38
Outline
Introduction
State of the Art
The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 46/38
Conclusion (I)
► Platform to access the most-used services in mobile phones using NFC.
► New approach for NFC-based interaction: Actions as combinations of tags.
► Proposed interaction scheme considered convenient and useful by test users.
Conclusion
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 47/38
Conclusion (II)
► NFC also proved faster than touchscreen, specially for…
►Older people (over 30 years old)
► Those less familiar with touch-based interaction
► Those less familiar with new technologies in general
► Learning curve of NFC-based interaction also proved to be low.
Conclusion
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 48/38
Future Work
► Run a larger scale experiment
► Larger number of subjects, more homogeneous groups
►More subjects in older age groups
►More people with lower technological skills
►Minimize dependency among variables
► Longer in time
► Study the long-term learning effect in both interaction approaches
► Apart from studying task efficiency, measure interaction errors with both technologies
Conclusion
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 49/38
¡GRACIAS!
THANK YOU!
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 50/38
All rights of images are reserved by the original owners*, the rest of the content is licensed under a
Creative Commons by-sa 3.0 license.
Android Open Source Project: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nexus_4.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nexus_10.png
Stefan Svartling: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/LJ44WQRTFlHX5ciB_xLV8lDUMCdxqHK-2KnxRTTdAcc Google Inc.: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Google_Chrome_icon_(2011).svg Photoshopedia: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/33896/camera_photography_webdesign_icon Wwalczyszyn: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/67500/android_maps_r_icon Aha-Soft: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/54522/feed_garbage_good_tidings_journal_lection_literary_garbage_mandarin_mandarine_news_newspaper_orange_organ_paper_print_read_reader_reading_retiree_rss_sheet_slipslop_tangerine_tidings_uncos_yellow_icon https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/54526/community_connection_consultation_consulting_earth_global_group_internet_large_group_network_polar_round_table_social_social_network_users_world_icon Alessandro Rei: http://findicons.com/icon/254687/audacity Oliver Scholtz (and others): https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/24246/and_calendar_preferences_tasks_icon Bharathp666: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/72149/android_base_gmail_icon Juan José Aza: http://www.flickr.com/photos/todojuanjo/2630161117/ Chris Arvin: http://dribbble.com/shots/396641-Freebie-PSD-Android-4-0-UI?list=users W3C: http://www.w3.org/RDF/icons/rdf_flyer.svg TAPPIN: http://tappinn.com/public/images/main2011/nfc-sticker.jpg Icons Land: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/73049/base_chartreuse_inside_map_marker_socialmediabookmark_icon Everaldo Coelho: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/18095/clouds_sun_weather_icon
*
NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction 51/38
DeustoTech - Deusto Institute of Technology, University of Deusto
http://www.morelab.deusto.es
Mobile NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction: Architecture Proposal and Evaluation
Koldo Zabaleta
{koldo.zabaleta@deusto.es}
top related