Posts tagged RWTH Aachen
Master thesis – Related work
1As we read before in the Introduction, collaboration is a recursive and iterative process with the purpose of solving a problem or a situation in a systematic way (Dictionary 2007). It implies two or more individuals or organizations involvement in a mutually interested common goal. This process is creative in nature and its results are dependent on knowledge sharing, on learning from each team member and on building consensus towards a commonly recognized solution. Because humans are essentially different, the tendency is to form strong believes based not only on objective facts, but also subjective. Thus leadership is required, allowing all participants to express themselves and keep also the entire process focused on a specific path towards the goal. (Hilliges und al. 2007)
The collaboration process is also based on the fact that one people might not have the entire knowledge base required to solve a complex problem. Additionally, because each individual has a different understanding of the information, the knowledge might be distributed and sometimes controversial. There is a “Symmetry of Ignorance” (Fischer 2000) defined, in which different people are collaborating together, each one having different background and knowledge. They complete each other, learning and teaching, presenting the situation perceived through their different viewpoints, discovering alternatives or subtle problems of others’ proposed approach.
The basic requirement a system has to fulfill in order to be considered as supporting the brainstorming process is to allow the registration of ideas and their display in one place. This is a very basic purpose, as even a pen and pieces of papers can fulfill it. Yet without it we cannot conceive the support for a brainstorming session.
A second requirement to be fulfilled by a system in order to be considered is to use the Natural User Interface paradigm, as this is the subject of interest.
All other features which affect the level of system’s usability are considered additional.
Deriving from the research questions and from the interest of the thesis, a framework for analysis has been developed. The framework will be used to evaluate the brainstorming applications and to investigate their solution to the research problems. The properties of the framework can be divided into five categories.
- Additional features that the present thesis investigates are related to manipulation of ideas and brainstorming sessions, features which have an impact on the usability of any system supporting brainstorming:
- The ability to organize ideas into groups or categories;
- The possibility to create relationships between ideas, linking them into logical constructions;
- Saving the session is an important feature, as it allows the results to be persisted over the time;
- Resuming the session is also important, allowing other teams to further continue and improve the brainstorming session result.
- The interactivity would benefit from using natural gestures, allowing the participants to focus more on ideas and less on the tools to input them into the system (Billinghurst 2008). Additionally, it would be interesting to know what input devices / mechanisms are available and in what degree the users prefer to use each of them.
- To answer the research question regarding the way to support the brainstorming process the framework proposes to investigate the mechanisms used by the related systems to help the brainstorming session and the idea generation;
- It is interesting to study if the brainstorming session is used by other applications. Hence, the thesis will look for the integration of the related applications with other system as a baseline;
- One other research question the thesis must answer is about the mechanisms to address the physical limitation of the tabletop. Therefore, the framework will investigate how do other brainstorming applications address the scenario when too many people join the session to be able to position themselves around a physically limited tabletop.
The research on collaboration using tabletops is quite extensive for how few actual commercial devices exist, but nonetheless it shows the potential in this area. A matrix with the features provided by each system is presented below in Table 1 – Matrix of the features employed by the related systems.
|
|
Reviewed systems |
|||||
|
Questions |
Breyn |
Touch & Write / LeCoOnt |
Pond |
WeSearch |
Docubits and Containers |
APDT |
| Organization of ideas |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Partially |
| Relating ideas |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
| Saving session |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
| Resuming session |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
N/A |
| Supports other input devices |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
| Helpers for idea generation |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
| Integration with other applications |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
| Physical limitation addressed |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Table 1 – Matrix of the features employed by the related systems
Analyzing the above table, an interesting result arises. Almost all application have the basic properties of organizing and relating ideas. On the other hand almost none of them helps the brainstorming session and don’t address the physical limitations of the tabletop. Additionally, only one of them allows the result of the brainstorming session to be reused in another application.
As we can see, none of the already presented systems meet all requirements. Thus, I will introduce a concept for new application – Brainstorming activity support on multitouch and multiuser devices.
Master Thesis – Introduction
2
The advent of multitouch interfaces leads the interaction between people to new levels of complexity. In the same time it had an impact on the software development: instead of interpreting just a couple of input devices, the software must now interact with multiple fingertip contacts, tags and objects placed on the device. This is quite a big jump from the classical combination of the mouse and the keyboard. Because of the technical difficulties, the multitouch interfaces started to be present on small devices and just one user being capable of controlling the device. Later they evolved to being available also for large devices, usually horizontally oriented, that enable multiple user interactions on the same set of objects. Although some users had more devices, like a special mouse, tablet or joystick, the interaction was quite the same – one user, one computer, usually just one device used in one time.
Along with the increasing computer power the multitouch and (some of them) multiuser devices got more and more complex, not only in respect to the underlying hardware, but mostly regarding the software responsible for driving the experience. New software controls and frameworks were created to support multiple interactions, but this was not all – a new User Interface paradigm was needed.
The natural gesture of touching employed by the new devices’ interface led to it becoming ubiquitous. The interface dissolved itself in the device that we are using, creating a more natural interaction. And so the term Natural User Interface was born. This paradigm of interaction became supported by few different companies who understood that the customers using their devices appreciate their experience when it is simple and as natural as possible. People are not required to learn complex functions or sequence of key presses in order to get a simple result – a swipe of finger on the screen might be enough. Replacing the learning cognitive processes and choosing based on understanding and pointing allows users to concentrate on what they do, as opposed to how to do it. This allows them to easily express their imagination without interruptions due to remembering sequences of actions from the memory.
The questions that arise from this approach are many: regarding implementation due to system novelty and relative low number of resources for creating applications, and regarding social aspect addressing issues like how do the participants feel using the system, as opposed to the traditional approaches.
My thesis proposes itself to study:
- If the User Experience using brainstorming applications running on multiuser multitouch tabletops is engaging;
- If it is useful to have post-brainstorming ideas organization;
- If is the brainstorming process successfully supported by mashing with other systems (e.g. Twitter);
- If is integration with small mobile devices a good solution to address the physical limitation of the tabletop;
- Is it important to be able to persist the result of the brainstorming session?
Let’s see what other scientists did before!
Media Informatics Master
0
In the Autumn of 2008 I joined the Media Informatics Master program, saying goodbye to Alensa Online team. It is part of the Bonn-Aachen International Center for Information Technology (B-IT) and was created through the collaboration of prestigious German institutions:
- University of Bonn,
- RWTH Aachen University,
- University of Applied Sciences Bonn Rhein-Sieg,
- Fraunhofer Institute Centre Birlinghoven Castle IZB
Supported by the B-IT Foundation and complementary state resources, B-IT offers highly selective International Master Programs in Applied IT, as well as the summer/winter schools for qualified computer science students.
Most courses take place in the beautiful B-IT building next to the former office of the German Chancellor on the banks of the River Rhine in Bonn.
The University of Bonn has almost 200 years of history, over 38.000 students from 130 countries, with an excellent research record and an excellent graduate education have made one of the ten largest universities in Germany.
In the context of more than one hundred first degree programs, the university engages in a broad range of international co-operations in research and teaching.
Founded in 1868, RWTH Aachen University is Germany’s top-ranked University of Technology and one of Germany’s nine Elite Universities. Of its 30,000 students, over 4,000 are international, including 900 students from the Asian-Pacific region. In addition to 65 first degree programs, RWTH offers more than 20 graduate programs in Science and Engineering.
Within the Fraunhofer Society of Applied Research, the four institutes in Birlinghoven Castle represent a quarter of the largest IT research organization in Europe. Over 500 post-graduate researchers investigate Autonomous Intelligent Systems, Applied Information Technology, Media Communications, Algorithms and Scientific Computing in a world-wide network of industry and research partners.
GPS vs aGPS vs WiFi vs GSM localization
1Each method presented has its strengths and weaknesses. None of these is the perfect positioning system, yet they all can collaborate in order to give the estimated position of a user.
GPS, the veteran of the group, has a plethora of satellites at its disposal, offering almost anywhere in the world a precision in meters. The devices which implement this technology are small enough to be inserted even in phones, smart enough to do their job or even more by tracking many satellites in the same time and eating less power, affording the usage of this service for hours in a row. But it needs clear sight to the sky in order to see at least 3 satellites and needs quite a long time in this busy era to get a clear position and be able to pinpoint the location on a map.
GPS – Global positioning system
0
GPS is the oldest one from the frameworks available to the large audience. It isn’t the first positioning system, but it is the one with the most success and longevity. It started as a military project in 1957. Because of the cold war, once the Russians sent to space the first man-made satellite, a team of scientists started monitoring its radio transmissions. The crucial discovery was that, because of the Doppler Effect, the signal transmitted frequency increases as the satellite approached, and lowers as it continued moved away from them. This added to the fact that they knew their exact location on the globe, the logical conclusion was that one could pinpoint where the satellite was along its orbit by measuring the Doppler distortion.
SCRUM
1- one of Agile processes
- use incremental framework for developing complex software
- managing new products
- considered more like a framework in which you can employ various processes and techniques
- Key principle: during a project the customers can change their minds
Manages complex processes by:
- Transparency
- The outcome of the product should be visible to the manager who is managing the outcomes. Also each process that affect the outcome of the product also should been visible to the managers.
- Inspection
- Various aspects of the process must be frequently inspected regularly so that quality of work and peoples can be seen.
- Adaptation
- If the inspection process find outs some process are outside the scope of the product or the outcomes will be unacceptable, then the inspector should response quickly and adjusts the process or data being used in the process.
Agile vs Waterfall
0|
Waterfall model:
|
eXtreme Programming
|
Agile roots: Toyota Production System
2This methodology and set of principles has the root in the company with the same name. After the Second World War, the Japan and its companies were almost ruined both physical and financial. To recover the economy, they had to rethink all the processes of production in order to maximize their efficiency. This was required because not only that they lack financial resources, but even the loans that they could do as a country came with big price. In Toyota Company, a smart man called Taiichi Ohno, created a new way to build cars, focusing on creating as many quality products possible with limited amount of resources.
Agile – techniques, principles and methodology
0Because the software industry is so different than any other, the development model used prior of creating agile methodology was taken from the engineering disciplines, such as civil or mechanical engineering. Those disciplines put a lot of emphasis on planning before you build because the resources are very expensive and cannot be wasted because of bad synchronization or different physical characteristics like calibers, by example. The planning style is a predictive method that focuses on planning the future in detail. A team that uses these predictive techniques can report precisely what features and tasks are scheduled, both their order and length, for the entire time span of the development process. Predictive teams are very difficult to redirect after the client needs. The plan is typically optimized for the original destination and changing direction can cause completed work to be thrown away and done over differently. These teams will often institute a change control board to ensure that only the most valuable changes are considered.
Agile Lab – Coining the Agile techniques
0
The roots of agile programming as we know it can be traced back to 2001. At Snowbird ski resort in the Wasatch Mountains of Utah, a group of seventeen people met have fun, but also to find common ground on a issue that was too much discussed but no result can be achieved. They were the leaders of different currents of improving software creation techniques. They were adepts of Extreme Programming, SCRUM, DSDM, Adaptive Software Development, Crystal, Feature-Driven Development, Pragmatic Programming and other agile techniques, joined together by the need for an alternative to documentation driven, heavyweight software development processes.