The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Issue No.01 - January/February (2006 vol.26)
pp: 56-63
Andreas Butz , University of Munich, Germany
Antonio Kr? , University of Muenster, Germany
This article presents the generalized peephole metaphor, a model of interaction for ubiquitous computing and instrumented environments. The metaphor provides a way of organizing and structuring ubiquitous input and output facilities in instrumented environments consisting of several distributed but coordinated sensors and displays. Its main idea is to look at the environment as one large display and sensor continuum, in which peepholes provide localized and user-specific windows between the physical environment and a virtual information layer. The metaphor nicely matches models of human perception, for example the fact that humans make use of external representation in their environments and access information by guiding their attention to specific locations. The article presents a specific mixed-reality room and shows how a number of input and output activities can be described in terms of the peephole metaphor. It discusses how the metaphor can cope with scalability and access control and how it supports a family of interaction styles and presentation methods in instrumented environments. It analyzes the technological requirements for implementing the peephole metaphor and show that it works well with the limited hardware already available, such as projector-camera units, wall-mounted displays, and portable screens.
human?computer interaction, user interface metaphors, instrumented environments, peepholes, ubiquitous computing
Andreas Butz, Antonio Kr?, "Applying the Peephole Metaphor in a Mixed-Reality Room", IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, vol.26, no. 1, pp. 56-63, January/February 2006, doi:10.1109/MCG.2006.10
1. R. Want et al., The Parctab Ubiquitous Computing Experiment, tech. report CSL-95-1, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center, Mar. 1995.
2. G.W. Fitzmaurice, "Situated Information Spaces and Spatially Aware Palmtop Computers," Comm. ACM, vol. 36, no. 7, 1993, pp. 38-49.
3. C. Pinhanez, "Using a Steerable Projector and a Camera to Transform Surfaces into Interactive Displays," Proc. ACM Conf. Human Factors in Computing, ACM Press, 2001, pp. 369-370.
4. K.-P. Yee, "Peephole Displays: Pen Interaction on Spatially Aware Handheld Computers," Proc. ACM Conf. Human Factors in Computing, ACM Press, 2003, pp. 1-8.
5. E.A. Bier et al., "Toolglass and Magic Lenses: The See-Through Interface," Computer Graphics, vol. 73, no. 27, 1993, pp. 73-80.
6. Andreas Butz et al., "Enveloping Users and Computers in a Collaborative 3D Augmented Reality," Proc. Int'l Workshop Augmented Reality (IWAR), IEEE CS Press, 1999, pp. 35-44.
7. R. Rensink, "Internal vs. External Information in Visual Representation," Proc. Smart Graphics, ACM Press, 2002, pp. 63-70.
8. A. Butz, M. Schneider, and M. Spassova, "Searchlight— A Lightweight Search Function for Pervasive Environments," Proc. Pervasive, LNCS 3001, Springer Verlag, 2004, pp. 351-356.
9. S. van Mulken, E. Andre, and J. Mueller, "The Persona Effect: How Substantial Is It," Proc. Human–Computer Interaction Conf., Springer Verlag, 1998, pp. 53-58.
10. M. Kruppa, M. Spassova, and M. Schmitz, "The Virtual Room Inhabitant," Proc. MU3I: Multi-User and Ubiquitous User Interfaces Workshop, 2005; p02-Schmitz.pdf.
11. A. Butz and R. Jung, "Seamless User Notification in Ambient Soundscapes," Proc. Int'l Conf. Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI), ACM Press, 2005, pp. 320-322.
14 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool