science activity planner user interface redesign ben glenn alesha jordan jenica rangos angela wagner...
Post on 17-Jan-2016
216 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Science Activity PlannerUser Interface Redesign
Ben GlennAlesha JordanJenica RangosAngela WagnerDarin Wonn
August 4th, 2004
A Joint Project ofNASA Ames Human Computer Interaction GroupCarnegie Mellon Human Computer Interaction InstituteJet Propulsion Laboratory
Agenda
• MER Mission Overview• NASA’s Science Planning Tools• Project Scope & Design Challenges• Preliminary Research Findings• Science Planning Process Redesign• Design Methodology & Rationale• Prototype Demonstration &
Interaction Walkthroughs• Conclusions & Recommendations
MER Mission Overview
• Mars Exploration Rovers: Spirit and Opportunity
• Mission goal: Search for signs of water on Mars
• Rovers were designed for a 90 sol primary mission, but are still going strong after over 200 sols on the surface of Mars
• MER mission costs around $4M per day to operate
NASA’s Science Planning ToolsPrimary applications used in planning• Science Activity Planner (SAP)
– Downlink: data analysis– Uplink: activity planning
• Constraint Editor (CE)– Browser app for setting constraints
• MER Activity Plan Generator (MAPGEN)– Automated optimized scheduler
ScienceActivityPlanner
ScienceActivityPlanner
ConstraintEditor
ConstraintEditor MAPGENMAPGEN
Science Activity Planner (SAP)
Constraint Editor (CE)
MER Activity Plan Generator (MAPGEN)
Project Scope
Specify a tool for NASA scientists to track and review science data, and create and constrain rover activities in an immersive environment. The tool must capture and convey the scientists’ intent throughout the planning cycle.
Project Scope
What does this really mean?Design an application that supports data analysis, activity planning, and constraint editing across all stages of the mission.
SAPDownlink
(data)
SAP Uplink
(planning)
ConstraintEditorSAP 2.0
Design Challenges
• Support distributed collaboration• Support multiple mission stages
– Primary vs. Extended– Templatized vs. Non-templatized
• “Immersive” planning environment– Navigation through time and space– Visual representation of activities– Control visual clutter
• Provide round-trip data tracking• Integrate Constraint Editor features
Process Overview
& Prototype
Preliminary Research
Initial focus: Mixed-initiative planning• In-situ observations of NASA
scientists during MER primary mission– Two trips to JPL (Pasadena)– Observed six planning cycles
• Contextual inquiries and modeling of “analogous environments”– PAT Transit– Taco Bell– LITA (CMU autonomous rover
project)
Preliminary Research
Initial focus: Mixed-initiative planning
• Think-alouds using planning software– Microsoft Project (8 users)– Miss Bride Wedding Planner (6
users)
• Literature review (30+ papers)• Expert interviews (3 experts)• Competitive analysis (15+
systems)
FocusFocus
Mixed initiative planning overview
SystemModel
UserData
SystemConstraints
ActivityConstraints
Set Goals & Priorities
GeneratePlan
Entry into Planner
ModifyPlan
FinalizePlan
Iterate
SAPSAP
ConstraintEditor
ConstraintEditor
MAPGENMAPGEN
Root Cause #3Human can’t convey
intent to system
Science Planning Process Redesign
Preliminary design focus: Specify a science planning process to address breakdowns in current planning process and to support our assumptions about MSL ‘09
– Distributed collaboration– Multiple mission phases
User Interface DesignMethodology & Rationale
Design Methodology
Protocols Tools Users
Design Cycle 0Process validation, multi-phase mission definition/analysis
Contextual inquiry, In-situ observation
Flow diagrams 12 users• 2 Tactical Act Planners• 4 Payload Uplink Leads• 2 Geologists• 2 Mineralogists• 2 Rover Planners
Design Cycle 1Data-tracking, constraint/plan visualizations
Collaborative design
Paper prototypes
5 users• 2 Payload Uplink Leads• 2 Geologists• 1 Long Term Planner
Design Cycle 2Interaction modes, screen elements, planning processes
Think-aloud testing, Collaborative design
VB prototype 7 users• 4 Payload Uplink Leads• 1 Geologist• 2 Systems Planners
Design Cycle 3Immersive planning, spatial navigation, activity creation
Think-aloud testing, Collaborative design
VB prototype,paper prototypes
6 users• 4 Geologists• 1 Mineralogist• 1 Atmospheric
Protocols, Tools, Users
Interface Components
Interface Design: Mission Library
Key Features• Complete record of mission
plans– Executed & unexecuted activities– Supports reuse of prior activities
• Quick access to data products– Round-trip data tracking (status)– Thumbnails for visual scanning– Easily export to external apps
• Filters allow user to display only the activities and data products relevant to their immediate task
Interface Design: Mission Library
Open Data Product
Export Data Product
View Details
Copy to Editor
Palette Menu
Thumbnail
Open Info Panel
Status Indicator
Filter Turnbuckle
Interface Design: Mission Library
Reset filters to start state
Filter criteria
Interface Design: Mission Library
Design Cycle 1
Test Results• All users identified a need to easily access
mission data• 4 out of 5 users found filter feature useful• 3 users suggested replacing Science Group
filter with another filter• 2 users didn’t understand “Show All” label
Test Results• 5 of 7 users found the filter behavior intuitive• 3 users suggested replacing Target Type
filter with another filter• 4 users wanted ability to filter by Site• 3 users requested ability to export data to an
external application
Interface Design: Mission Library
Design Cycle 2
Test Results• Users continued to express concerns
about screen real estate, prompting creation of turnbuckle for hiding filters
• Specific behavior of View/Export buttons requires further testing
Interface Design: Mission Library
Design Cycle 3
Interface Design: Hopper
Key Features• Central queue for distributed,
collaborative activity planning• Supports work-flow
management, conflict prevention/resolution– Scientists “check-out” assigned
activities to their Editor to do detailed parameter specification
– “Quick Edit” button immediately checks out and opens an activity for editing
Interface Design: Hopper
Key Features (continued)• Persistent planning
– Unexecuted activities persist in the Hopper until they “expire” due to certain constraints (i.e. rover moves away from target)
– Activities that are designated as repeating or systematic persist in the Hopper and are automatically re-submitted to the planner
Interface Design: Hopper
Key Features (continued)• Long-range planning
– Hopper provides look-ahead– Scientists can begin planning
activities days in advance
• Intelligent ordering– Items in Hopper are sequenced
according to ordering constraints
• Visual constraint representation– Visualizations may be toggled
on/off to control clutter
Interface Design: Hopper
Quick Edit
Check-out to Editor
Palette Menu
Ordering Constraint Visualization
Open Info Panel
Constraint Indicator
View Details
Toggle Constraint Visualizations
Lock indicates item is checked out by another user
Interface Design: HopperDesign Cycle 1
Test Results• 5 of 7 users recognized need for a Hopper;
2 were “enthusiastic”• 3 users didn’t understand constraint arrows;
4 expressed concerns about the scalability of this representation
Interface Design: HopperDesign Cycle 2
Test Results• Lingering confusion about the Hopper-
Editor distinction motivated removal of all editing capabilities from Hopper
• Approximately half of the users expressed concern that the check-out process was an extra step that would slow them down
Interface Design: HopperDesign Cycle 3
Test Results• 5 of 6 users instinctively used drag-and-
drop to check activities out of the Hopper• 3 users suggested there be a visual
indicator that activities are checked-out
Interface Design: Editor
Key Features• Private workspace for editing
and creating activities– Activities checked-out of
Hopper are edited in the Editor– Activities are built from scratch
with the toolbar or reused by copying from Mission Library or Template Library
• Visual constraint representation, intelligent ordering (as in Hopper)
Interface Design: Editor
New Activity
Delete Item
Palette Menu
Open Info Panel
Constraint Indicator
View Details
Toggle Constraint Visualizations
Indicates item is checked out of the Hopper
Check-in to Hopper
New Observation
Interface Design: EditorDesign Cycle 1
Design Cycle 2 Design Cycle 3
Interface Design: Palettes
Key Features• User-customizable
– Palettes may be resized, docked
– Palettes can be combined with other palettes to preserve screen real estate
• Palettes support drag-and-drop– Copy activities from Mission
Library and Template Library– Check activities into or out of
the Hopper
Interface Design: Palettes
Test Results• Users consistently requested ability to
create custom views of their workspace• Screen real estate a concern but felt it
would be mitigated through resizable palettes (and multiple monitors)
• Strong support for drop-and-drop functionality across all design cycles
Design Cycle 2 Design Cycle 3
Details Panel Widget
“Immersive” Planning Environment
Key Features• Interactive space that allows
scientists to plan activities and retrieve data in-context
• Four primary components– Viewer window– Navigator palette– View Control palette– Activity toolbar
• User data for these components will be presented after UI spec
Interface Design: Viewer Window
Key Features• Image data is overlaid on a 3d
terrain model and displayed as a navigable space
• User can pan, rotate, and zoom using the mouse– Cursor changes to indicate
action– Interaction mechanism similar
to QuickTimeVR
• Multiple views can be opened in the main window
Interface Design: Navigator
Key Features• Overhead view of Mars
provides spatial context to scientists
• Targets represent locations with navigable image data– Selecting a target changes the
Viewer window to that location
• Slider for adjusting map scale• Filter for specifying
classification of data products to be displayed
Interface Design: Navigator
Filter Menu
Palette Menu
Selected Target
Unselected Target
Scale Slider
Interface Design: View Control
Key Features• Controls azimuth (direction),
elevation and zoom of current view in the Viewer window
• Visually indicates the rover’s orientation when the navigable data product was captured
Interface Design: View Control
Palette Menu
Zoom Slider
Elevation Control
Azimuth Control
Rover Orientation
Interface Design: Activity Toolbar
Key Features• Tools for selecting, panning,
zooming, and targeting• Instrument tools for building
activities in the interactive planning environment
Interface Design: Activity Toolbar
Target Tool
Zoom Tool
Camera Instruments
Select Tool
Imagers and Spectrometers
Pan Tool
Drive, arm, and magnet activities
“Immersive” vs. “Non-Immersive”
• The two interfaces complement each other– Palettes are used to toggle items
on/off in the “immersive” space, reducing visual clutter
– Select-state is consistent across both interfaces
• Some tasks are better suited to a particular interface– Target creation in immersive UI– Constraint editing using palettes
“Immersive” vs. “Non-Immersive”
Controlling the immersive view using the palettes
“Immersive” vs. “Non-Immersive”
Spatially locating an activity via the Editor palette
“Immersive” Planning Environment
Test Results• 6 of 6 users liked the Photoshop “eyeball”
method for toggling visibility of activities• 5 of 6 users understood color-coded palettes• Users performed unexpected drag-n-drop
actions between immersive/non-immersive
This green star was intended to indicate the location of a data productAll 6 users misinterpreted the green star to be a clickable target
This red arrow indicates a data product is available off-screenHalf the users thought the arrow showed the rover’s orientation
Prototype DemonstrationInteraction Walkthroughs
Prototype Overview
• Used for late-stage user testing• Developed in Visual Basic .NET• Functioning features
– Dynamic display of data architecture
– Activity reuse from Mission Library– Checking activities in/out of Hopper– Creating new observations/activities
in Editor– Navigation between Martian
locations via the Navigator
Interaction Diagrams
Storyboards illustrating interactions not fully implemented in prototype
– Activity Representation – Target Creation– Targeted Activity Creation– Non-Targeted Activity Creation– Navigation
Conclusions and RecommendationsAddressing our design challenges…• Supported distributed collaboration
– via Hopper workflow features
• Supported multiple mission stages– via flexible planning process
• Provided round-trip data tracking– via Mission Library data filters
• Integrated Constraint Editor features– via Activity Details constraints tab
• New immersive planning environment– designed and tested navigation
techniques– developed visual language for activities– managed clutter via palette view toggles
Conclusions and RecommendationsAreas for future exploration…• Multiple Hopper views to visualize ordering
and time-of-Sol constraints• Constraint specification in collaborative
spaces• Resource budgets and visualizations• Further testing and refinement of
“immersive” planning and navigation techniques
A sneak preview of the ’09 mission…
top related