Author Archives: Andrew

CLW 2012 report

Background
The 2012 Cognitive Load and In-Vehicle Human-Machine Interaction workshop (CLW 2012) was held in conjunction with AutomotiveUI 2012 in Portsmouth, NH. The workshop was the second CLW in a row – CLW 2011 was held at AutomotiveUI 2011 in Salzburg, Austria.

Overview
Over 35 people from government, industry and academia attended CLW 2012.

For CLW 2012 the organizers made the decision to involve a large number of experts in the workshop, instead of only including contributions by authors responding to our CFP. Thus, the CLW 2012 program included three expert presentations, as well as a government-industry panel with four participants. Each of these expert participants discussed unique aspects of estimating and utilizing cognitive load for the design and deployment of in-vehicle human-machine interfaces.

Bryan Reimer opened the expert presentations with a discussion of the relationship between driver distraction and cognitive load. Next, Bruce Mehler discussed practical issues in estimating cognitive load from physiological measures. Finally, Paul Green discussed how cognitive load measures might fit in with the NHTSA visual-manual guidelines.

The expert presentations were followed by a government-industry panel. Chris Monk (Human Factors Division Chief at NHTSA) presented the NHTSA perspective on cognitive load and HMI design. Jim Foley (Toyota Technical Center, USA) introduced the OEM perspective. Scott Pennock (QNX & ITU-T Focus Group on Driver Distraction) introduced issues related to standardization. Garrett Weinberg (Nuance) focused on issues related to voice user interfaces.

Following these presentations, and the accompanying lively discussions, workshop participants viewed eight posters.

Evaluation
At the end of the workshop we asked participants to indicate their level of agreement with these four statements:

  1. I found the workshop to be useful.
  2. I enjoyed the workshop.
  3. I would attend a similar workshop at a future AutomotiveUI conference.
  4. This workshop is the reason I am attending AutomotiveUI 2011.

The responses of 13 participants are shown below (the workshop organizers in attendance did not complete the questionnaire). They indicate that the workshop was a success.

Next steps
Since  the conclusion of CLW 2012 co-organizers Peter Froehlich and Andrew Kun joined forces with Susanne Boll and Jim Foley to organize a workshop at CHI 2013 on automotive user interfaces. Also, a proposal for CLW 2013 at AutomotiveUI 2013 is in the works.

Thank you presenters and participants!
The organizers would like to extend our warmest appreciation to all of the presenters for the work that went into the expert presentations, the panel discussion, and the poster papers and presentations. We would also like to thank all of the workshop attendees for raising questions, discussing posters, and sharing their knowledge and expertise.

You can see more pictures from CLW 2012 on Flickr.

This report is also available on the CLW website.

AutomotiveUI 2012 report published in IEEE Pervasive Computing

The report on the AutomotiveUI 2012 conference, co-authored by Linda Boyle, Bryan Reimer, Andreas Riener and me, was recently published by IEEE Pervasive Computing [1]. The reference on this page points to my final version of the paper. You can also download the paper with the published layout directly from the IEEE here.

 

References

[1] Andrew L. Kun, Linda Ng Boyle, Bryan Reimer, Andreas Riener, “AutomotiveUI: Interacting with technology in vehicles,” IEEE Pervasive Computing, April-June 2103

Tim April defends MS thesis

Tim April recently defended his MS thesis [1]. Tim’s topic of exploration was multitouch surfaces and how interactions with these surfaces might be improved with the use of tangible user interfaces. Here’s a picture from the defense (for more pictures see Flickr):

Tim is currently Security Researcher at Akamai Technologies.

 

References

[1] Tim April, “Comparing and Contrasting Manual Direct Touch Interaction with Tangible User Interfaces for Mapping Applications,” MS Thesis, University of New Hampshire, 2013

Fall 2013 Pervasive Computing Course

During the fall 2013 semester I will be teaching a course exploring the fundamentals of pervasive (or ubiquitous) computing. The course is listed as ECE 796/896 Spc Top/Pervasive Computing. This is the second time I’ll teach this course – the first time was in 2010.

Why pervasive computing?
We have entered the third era of modern computing. This era is defined by computing devices that are embedded in everyday objects and become part of everyday activities. These devices are also connected to other devices or networks in an effort to share or gather information.  Pervasive computing is a multidisciplinary field of study that explores the design and implementation of such embedded, networked computing devices. The field is young but it is developing fast and appears to have unstoppable momentum.

The course in a nutshell
The Pervasive Computing Fundamentals course has two major thrusts:

1. Lectures: Lectures introducing fundamental material from papers, a textbook edited by John Krumm, and close to 40 research videos. Topics covered will include system software for supporting percom, human-computer interaction in percom systems, privacy issues, context awareness, and location-based services.
2. Projects: Following a project requirements document, students (teams and individuals) will first select topics, with the guidance of the instructor. They will then prepare a proposal, complete the project, and report on it at the end of the semester through a written document and an oral presentation. Videos are encouraged.

 

Collaborative projects with Pratt Institute
Pratt Institute is one of the leading art, design and architecture schools in the US. Its Industrial Design Department is consistently ranked in the top 5 in the country. Rebeccah Pailes-Friedman is a multi-disciplinary designer and the founder of RPF Design Studio. She is also an Adjunct Associate Professor at Pratt. During the fall 2013 semester she will teach a junior studio on wearable technology for industrial design students. Rebeccah and I will help Pratt and UNH students form project teams. UNH students will primarily be responsible for the hardware and software development, while Pratt students will incorporate the hardware/software into wearable objects. Collaborating with Pratt students is not a requirement for UNH students, but it is highly encouraged (hopefully we can also go on a field trip to Pratt).

Two past projects
Here are two videos from 2010 to give you a taste for what a percom project might look like. Actually, if you collaborate with Pratt students, it’ll look even better – check out ID View 2012 for visuals of what you can expect.

Video 1: Data entry using handheld computers vs. paper

Video 2: Exploring group interaction with a multi-touch table

Who is this course for?
Students who will most benefit from the course are EE, CompE, CS and IT seniors and graduate students.

Organizational details
Class will meet MWF 4-5 PM. There will be an open lab in Morse 213 (ignore the lab time in the Time and Room Schedule).

For grading and such see the 2010 syllabus. The 2013 syllabus will be very similar.

Questions?
Send me email.

Lee Slezak visit

At the end of March we hosted Lee Slezak in our lab. Lee is Vehicle Systems and Testing Manager in DOE’s Vehicle Technology Program.

As part of the visit Lee saw our driving simulator lab, and we had a chance to discuss with him a number of projects, including work on a UNH ECE senior project that deals with personal navigation devices. Following this, Lee introduced us to the work of DOE’s Vehicle Technology Program. Three points from the presentation really resonated with me:

  1. Interoperability is a problem. As we have found in our work on in-vehicle devices for police cruisers (Project54) [1], and as many UNH ECE students find in working at UNH’s IOL, many devices are not designed with interoperability in mind. This is also true of the different devices people use to charge batteries in vehicles.
  2. Simulation can help focus R&D efforts. Our work on augmented reality personal navigation devices is a good example of using (driving) simulation to explore the value of an idea that is not yet technologically feasible (at least not with a reasonable price tag) [2]. DOE explores a number of technologies in simulation before committing to developing and testing hardware.
  3. Green racing can move automotive technology forward. Innovations used in car racing used to be transferable to consumer vehicles. This is almost never the case any more. Green racing is trying to change this: the green technologies that can win races can also provide improvements for everyday vehicles.

Here’s a photo of Lee discussing his ideas with us in the lab. For more photos see Flickr.

So, thanks Lee for taking the time to visit – it was a valuable and it was fun. I would also like to thank Kristin Bennett and Jan Nisbet for making Lee’s visit possible.

 

References

[1] Andrew L. Kun, W. Thomas Miller, III and William H. Lenharth, “Computers in police cruisers,” IEEE Pervasive Computing, Vol. 3, Issue 4, pp.: 34 – 41, Oct.-Dec. 2004

[2] Zeljko Medenica, Andrew L. Kun, Tim Paek, Oskar Palinko, “Augmented Reality vs. Street Views: A Driving Simulator Study Comparing Two Emerging Navigation Aids,” MobileHCI 2011

Zeljko Medenica defends dissertation

Last November Zeljko Medenica defended his dissertation [1]. Zeljko explored new performance measures that can be used to characterize interactions with in-vehicle devices. The impetus for this work came from our work with personal navigation devices. Specifically, in work published in 2009 [2] we found fairly large differences in the time drivers spend looking at the road ahead (more for voice-only turn-by-turn directions, less when there’s also a map displayed). However, the commonly used driving performance measures (average variance of lane position and steering wheel angle) did not indicate differences between these conditions. We thought that driving might still be affected, and Zeljko’s work confirms this hypothesis.

Zeljko is now with Nuance, working with Garrett Weinberg. Garrett and Zeljko collaborated during Zeljko’s internships at MERL (where Garrett worked prior to joining Nuance) in 2009 and 2010.

I would like to thank Zeljko’s committee for all of their contributions: Paul Green, Tim Paek, Tom Miller, and Nicholas Kirsch. Below is a photo of all of us after the defense. See more photos on Flickr.

Tim Paek (left), Zeljko Medenica, Andrew Kun, Tom Miller, Nicholas Kirsch, and Paul Green (on the laptop)

 

References

[1] Zeljko Medenica,  “Cross-Correlation Based Performance Measures for Characterizing the Influence of In-Vehicle Interfaces on Driving and Cognitive Workload,” Doctoral Dissertation, University of New Hampshire, 2012

[2] Andrew L. Kun, Tim Paek, Zeljko Medenica, Nemanja Memarovic, Oskar Palinko, “Glancing at Personal Navigation Devices Can Affect Driving: Experimental Results and Design Implications,” Automotive UI 2009

Special interest session on cognitive load at the 2012 ITS World Congress

This year Peter Froehlich and I co-organized a special interest session on cognitive load at the 2012 ITS World Congress. The session featured six experts in the field (in alphabetical order):

  • Corinne Brusque, Director, IFSTTAR LESCOT, France
  • Johan Engström, senior project manager, Volvo Technology, Sweden
  • James Foley, Senior Principal Engineer, CSRC, Toyota, USA
  • Chris Monk, Project Officer, US DOT
  • Kazumoto Morita, Senior Researcher, National Safety and Environment Laboratory, Japan
  • Scott Pennock, Chairman of the ITU-T Focus Group on Driver Distraction and Senior Hands-Free Standards Specialist at QNX, Canada

Peter posted a nice overview of the session, which also includes the presentation slides.

AutomotiveUI 2012 covered in local media

    

AutomotiveUI 2012 was covered in three excellent articles in local media in New Hampshire.

First, Paul Briand introduced the conference in a front-page article in the October 20 issue of the Portsmouth Herald. I am glad that Paul pointed out that this is a multi-disciplinary conference, and also that he included nice quotes from UNH researcher Oskar Palinko, who touched upon visual and cognitive distractions.

Next, UNH’s Beth Potier discussed our work in an excellent article in UNH Today. One of the highlights of Beth’s article for me was that she referenced two studies – our work on augmented reality published at MobileHCI 2011, and follow-on work being conducted by a team of UNH ECE seniors, as part of their senior project. Another highlight was this illustration by Bridget Finnegan:

Finally, Liz Markhlevskaya discussed the conference, and our work at UNH, in an article in the Foster’s Daily Democrat. I really like the fact that Liz clearly connected our work on deploying the Project54 system with our more recent driving simulator-based work.

AutomotiveUI 2012 hosts female 8th graders

Are you concerned about the low number of female graduates in fields such as electrical and computer engineering and computer science? I am – the numbers are truly dismal.

In an attempt to improve the situation a little,  I organized a visit of 21 female 8th graders to AutomotiveUI 2012. The students attend the Armand R. Dupont School in Allenstown, New Hampshire. They came to the conference with their math teacher, Michelle Kelly. Michelle and I have been planning this trip since this summer, when she conducted research in my lab at UNH.

Michelle’s students discussed the conference, as well as the work of engineers and scientists, with three women attending the conference: Linda Boyle (professor at University of Washington), Nora Broy (researcher at BMW) and Chee Lee Cheong (undergrad exchange student at UNH ECE). They asked many questions and were quite engaged in the ensuing conversations. I am confident that they left the conference feeling that science and engineering can be exciting careers (and Michelle agrees).