Opportunities and challenges for cross-device interactions in the wild
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
People are increasingly using multiple computing devices in their daily lives as portals into a shared online information space.We can select devices based on their form factor and affordances to match our task and context of use.Moreover, we are often using multiple devices at once, for example when sharing content, playing games, controlling other devices such as a smart TV, or collaboratively editing and presenting content in a meeting.The seamless use of multiple devices to work toward achieving the same goal is known as cross-device interaction.Cross-device interaction opens up new opportunities for how we interact with digital technology, but it also presents several fundamental challenges.To uncover some of these challenges, problems, and opportunities with cross-device interaction, we organized the well-attended Cross-Surface workshop series (http://www.cross-surface.com/).We discussed how such technologies could be used in the wild, supporting new domains and use cases at ACM Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces (ITS) 2015 [1]; how we could move away from Weiser's vision of ubiquitous devices to a "bring your own device" approach at CHI 2016 [2]; and finally, how space and spatial relations between people and devices could be used to support better device awareness at ACM Interactive Spaces and Surfaces (ISS) 2016 [3].In 1991, Mark Weiser outlined his vision for ubiquitous computing [4], in which people interact with multiple computing devices in different form factors.In his vision, people have ready access to a plethora of devices to pick up and use seamlessly, allowing them to interact with content through cross-device interactions.This work accelerated academic research into providing new technologies, conceptual models, and interaction techniques that support interactions across device ecologies [5,6].However, despite the availability of such a range of devices, technologies, and techniques, has this vision of cross-device ecologies really materialized?Weiser introduced three types of devices: inch-scale pads (similar to today's smartphones), footscale pads (similar to today's tablets), and yard-scale boards (similar to today's large displays).Two decades later, this aspect of Weiser's vision concerning interaction with multiple devices in What's Next?Cross-device interaction is an exciting new area that has seen increased focus from both the research community and industry.Enabling interaction across many devices provides opportunities and potential benefits for application domains such as education, healthcare, and business.However, in practice, interacting across devices is challenging and often not possible.To move forward in cross-device interaction, we need to bridge the gap between the messiness and chaos of real-world ubiquitous computing [7] and the ideal of cross-device interaction and interacting across many different devices.More work is needed to explore in-the-wild use of cross-device ubiquitous computing systems.The seven challenges and opportunities we outlined here open up new and exciting avenues for research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle