This invention relates generally to human/computer interfaces and more particularly to mechanical input devices for computerized systems.
It has become increasingly common to computerize systems, from the trivial (e.g., the computerized toaster or coffee pot) to the exceedingly complex (e.g., complicated telecommunications and digital network systems). The advantage of computerization is that such systems become more flexible and powerful. However, the price that must be paid for this power and flexibility is, typically, an increase in the difficulty of the human/machine interface.
The fundamental reason for this problem is that computers operate on principles based on the abstract concepts of mathematics and logic, while humans tend to think in a more spatial manner. People inhabit the real world, and therefore are more comfortable with physical, three-dimensional objects than they are with the abstractions of the computer world. Since people do not think like computers, metaphors are adopted to permit people to effectively communicate with computers. In general, better metaphors permit more efficient and medium independent communications between people and computers.
There are, of course, a number of human/computer interfaces which allow users, with varying degrees of comfort and ease, to interact with computers. For example, keyboards, computer mice, joysticks, etc. allow users to physically manipulate a three-dimensional object to create an input into a computer system. However, these human/computer interfaces are quite artificial in nature, and tend to require a substantial investment in training to be used efficiently.
Progress has been made in improving the human/computer interface with the graphical user interface (GUI). With a GUI interface, icons are presented on a computer screen which represent physical objects. For example, a document file may look like a page of a document, a directory file might look like a file folder, and an icon of a trash can be used for disposing of documents and files. In other words, GUI interfaces use “metaphors” where a graphical icon represents a physical object familiar to users. This makes GUI interfaces easier to use for most users. GUI interfaces were pioneered at such places as Xerox PARC of Palo Alto, Calif. and Apple Computer, Inc. of Cupertino, Calif. The GUI is also often commonly used with UNIX™ based systems, and is rapidly becoming a standard in the PC-DOS world with the Windows™ operating system provided by Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, Wash.
While GUIs are a major advance in human/computer interfaces, they nonetheless present a user with a learning curve due to their still limited metaphor. In other words, an icon can only represent a physical object: it is not itself a physical object. Recognizing this problem, a number of researchers and companies have come up with alternative human/computer interfaces which operate on real-world metaphors. Some of these concepts are described in the July, 1993 special issue of Communications of the ACM, in an article entitled “Computer Augmented Environments, Back to the Real World.” Such computer augmented environments include immersive environments, where rooms are filled with sensors to control the settings of the room, as researched at New York University (NYU) in New York, N.Y. Another example is the electronic white boards of Wacom and others where ordinary-looking erasers and markers are used to create an electronic “ink.” Wellner describes a “DigitalDesk” that uses video cameras, paper, and a work station to move between the paper and the electronic worlds. Fitzmarice has a “Chameleon” unit which allows a user to walk up to a bookshelf and press a touch-sensitive LCD strip to hear more about a selected book. Finally, MIT Media Lab has a product known as Leggo/Logo which lets children program by snapping plastic building blocks together, where each of the building blocks includes an embedded microprocessor.
Bishop has developed a “marble answering machine” which appears to store a voice mail message in a marble that drops into a cup. The marble, in fact, triggers a pointer on a small computer which stores the message. To play back the message, the marble is dropped into the machine again. This marble answering machine has been publicly known at least as of June, 1993.
While strides have been made in attempting to improve human/computer interfaces, there is still progress to be made in this field. Ultimately, the interface itself should disappear from the conscious thought of users so that they can intuitively accomplish their goals without concern to the mechanics of the interface or the underlying operation of the computerized system.
The present invention improves the human-computer interface by using “interactors.” An interface couples a detection field to a controller computer system which, in turn, may be coupled to other systems. When an interactor is entered into the detection field, moved about within the detection field, or removed from the detection field, an event is detected which, when communicated to the computer system, can be used to create a control signal for either the controller computer system or to a system connected to the controller computer system. Preferably, the detection field is suitably sized and configured so that multiple users can simultaneously access the field and such that multiple interactors can be engaged with the field simultaneously.
By “interactor” it is meant that a physical, real world object is used that can convey information both to the controller computer system and to users. An interactor can provide identity (ID) information to the computer through an embedded computer chip, a bar code, etc. An object can also be made into an interactor by embedding higher-level logic, such as a program logic array, microprocessor, or even a full-blown microcomputer. An interactor forms part of a system wherein information is assigned by users to at least one object.
An interactor system in accordance with the present invention includes a detection space and a number of interactors which can be manually manipulated within the detection space. The interactors preferably have a unique ID. An interface responsive to the interactors in the detection space provides signals to communicate information concerning the interactors (e.g. ID, position, EXIT/ENTER, and “temporal” information) to the computer system. The EXIT/ENTER will often be referred to as UP/DOWN when referring to a two dimensional detection field, since an interactor is entered by putting it down on the field, and is exited by picking it up from the field. Importantly, the computer system processes the information within a semantic context to accomplish a user-desired task. By “semantic”, it is meant that the meaning of an interactor is dependent upon the context in which it is being used, both in terms of explicit and implicit assignments of function and content.
As will be appreciated from the above discussion, a method for controlling a computerized system includes the steps of: a) providing a detection space; b) placing a physical, identifiable interactor having a semantic meaning within the detection space; c) determining the meaning of the interactor within the semantic context; and d) controlling a computerized system in response to the semantic meaning of the interactor.
There are a number of specific applications' for the interactor technology of the present invention. Two examples are given, one which allows for the control of an audio system to create a “virtual room”, and the other which provides an event marking system for recorded media or other time based activities.
In the first example, an audio system is provided which can bring a number of widely dispersed individuals together into a common auditory space. For example, the audio system can provide a “virtual room” in which individuals are brought together in the auditory sense from various locations. For example, individuals A, B, and C can be in separate physical offices, yet individual A might wish to casually chat with individuals B and C as if they were in the same office space. Individual A then uses interactors representing B and C (perhaps with their pictures on them) in a detection field to indicate that he wishes to converse with individuals B and C. The interactors detected by the detection field generate control signals within a controlling computer to control microphones, speakers, and amplifiers to make this happen. In this fashion, and by a very simple metaphor, A, B, and C can be made to inhabit the same “virtual room” for conversation and other auditory communication.
In the second example, a videotape “marking” system is described. A videotape player is coupled to a controlling computer, and a videotape is played and observed by one or more users on a monitor. When an event occurring on the videotape is to be logged or marked, an interactor is engaged with the detection field. The controlling computer then retrieves timing information from the videotape player and combines this with the marking event. Removal of the interactor from the detection field can signify the end of the event, or can signify nothing, depending upon the context and the desires of the users. The detection field is preferably sized and configured so that multiple viewers of the video playback can simultaneously access the detection field. By taking a group approach, each individual can be watching for and marking a specific event or a small group of events. This approach can reduce the fatigue and tedium with logging videotape.
By using interactors, the human/computer interface is greatly enhanced. In the example of the audio control system, it takes little or no training to use the system since the interactors and their spatial relationships are intuitive to the user. Likewise, it is a very physically intuitive gesture for a user to place a labeled or otherwise evocative interactor on a detection field in response to a certain event detected in a video playback. The present invention therefore provides a more intuitive and richer metaphor for the interaction between humans and computerized systems. Furthermore, the present invention provides a system whereby multiple users simultaneously communicate with a computerized system using the metaphor.
These and other advantages of the present invention will become apparent upon reading the following detailed descriptions and studying the various figures of the drawings.
a is a schematic representation of the internal circuitry of the interactor of
a is a data word produced by the process of
b is a table illustrating the meanings associated with the state bit of the data word of
a illustrates a one-dimensional detection field;
b illustrates both a three-dimensional and a four-dimensional detection field;
c illustrates an alternative three-dimensional detection field;
a illustrates a first embodiment of the audio control system wherein the user is embodied into the system;
b illustrates a second embodiment of the audio control system wherein the user is not embodied into the system, i.e. is omniscient to the system;
c illustrates a layout of a two-dimensional detection field used for the audio control device;
In
These interactors 18 in conjunction with the detection space 12 help define a human/computer interface that is intuitive, flexible, rich in meaning, and is well adapted for use by multiple simultaneous users.
As used herein, the term “detection space” or the like will refer to any n-dimensional space in the physical world. The detection space will be alternatively referred to as a “detection field,” an “event field,” and the like. Therefore, such terms as “space,” “field,” “domain,” “volume,” should be considered as synonymous as used herein. However, “field” will be used more frequently with respect to a two dimensional detection space, while “space” will be used more frequently with respect to a three dimensional detection space.
Since we live in a three-dimensional world, any real-world detection space will have a three-dimensional aspect. However, if only two of those dimensions are used as input to the computer 14, we will refer to the detection field as a “two dimensional.” Likewise, if only one-dimension is used as an input to computer 14, we will refer herein to such a field as “one dimensional.” Furthermore, in certain embodiments of the present invention, the detection space may be time-variant, allowing the inclusion of four dimensional detection spaces. Various examples of detection spaces and fields will be discussed in greater detail subsequently.
Computer 14 is preferably a general purpose microcomputer made by any one of a variety of commercial vendors. For example, computer 14 can be a Macintosh computer system made by Apple Computer, Inc. or a PC/AT compatible DOS computer system made by Compaq, IBM, Packard-Bell, or others. Computer 14 is coupled to the detection space 12 as indicated at 20 such that it may receive information concerning an interactor 18 placed within the detection space 12. An interface is provided between the detection space 12 and the computer 14 which may be either internal to or external of the computer system 14. The design and implementation of interfaces is well known to those skilled in the art, although a preferred implementation of an interface of the present invention will be discussed in greater detail subsequently.
By coupling the optional system 16 to computer 14, interactors and the optional system 16 can interact within controller computer 14. The system 16 may serve as an input to computer 14, an output from computer 14, or both. When used as an input to computer 14, the system 16 can provide data on a line 22 which is used in conjunction with data on line 20 derived from the interaction of an interactor 18 with the detection space 12. When used as an output from the computer system 14, the system 16 can be controlled by the interaction of the interactor 18 with the detection space 12. The system 16 can be of a standard commercial design (e.g. a videotape player), or can be a custom system designed for a particular use.
An interactor system 24 used to mark events in a temporal flow is illustrated somewhat schematically in FIG. 2. The interactor system 24 includes a detection field 26, a computer 28, and a video system 30. With the interactor system 24, a videotape or other video source can be displayed on a screen 32 of the video system 30 and events can be “marked” by engaging interactors 34 with the detection field 26. The images on video screen 32 may be recorded such as within a recording/playback unit 35 of the video system 30, or may be purely transitory images, such as those produced by a video camera 36 of the video system 30. If recorded, the images can be “marked” contemporaneously with recording of the image, or after the fact. In the latter instance, the unit 35 would simply be used in its playback mode to playback an earlier recorded video tape for event marking.
The detection field 26 is, in this embodiment, a two-dimensional detection field in that it can detect positions of interactors 34 in both an “x” and a “y” direction. However, the detection field 26 of
The detection field 26 is coupled to the computer 28 by an interface 40. More particularly, a first cable 42 couples the detection field 26 to the interface 40, and a second cable 44 couples the interface 40 to the computer 28. The construction and operation of both the detection field 26 and interface 40 will be described in greater detail subsequently.
The video system 30 is coupled to computer 28 by a cable 46. Preferably, the computer 28 includes an internal video interface card which engages with a suitable connector at one end of the cable 46. Other embodiments have other arrangements for connecting the video system to the computer. Video systems 30 and video system interface cards (not shown) are commercially available from such sources as Radius Corporation of California. The video camera 36 can be coupled to the record/playback unit 35 by a cable 48, or can be directly coupled into the computer 28 through the aforementioned video interface card (not shown). Video cameras such as video camera 36 are available from a number of manufacturers including Sony Corporation of Japan.
In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, a plurality of permanent magnets 52 are provided in a first wall 54 of each of the V-shaped channels 38 corresponding, one each, with positions where interactors can be engaged with the channels. The backs 56 of interactors 34 are adapted to engage the walls 54 of the channels, i.e. preferably both the walls 54 of the channels and the backs 56 of the interactors are planar in configuration. Each of the interactors 34 are also provided with a magnet 58 which is attracted to a magnet 52 when the back 56 of the interactor 34 is engaged with a wall 54 of the V-shaped channel 38. This is accomplished by having opposing (N/S) poles of magnets 52 and 58 face each other when the interactor 34 is engaged with the channel 38. Since the magnets 52 and 58 are slightly offset in the vertical sense when the interactor 34 is engaged with the channel 38, a force F is exerted on each of the interactors 34 to firmly hold the back 56 against the wall 54 and to firmly hold a base 60 of the interactor 34 against an abutting wall 62 of the V-shape channels 38. Therefore, the magnets not only hold the interactors 34 in position, they also ensure good contact between abutting surfaces of the interactor 34 and channel 38.
As seen in
In
The interactors 34 and the detection field 26 are sized for easy use and for the simultaneous use by several persons. For example, the interactors 34 can have dimensions of about 0.5 in.×1.5 in.×2.0 in., while the detection field can have dimensions of about 1 ft×2 ft.×3 in. in height. This permits the interactors 34 to be comfortably held in a user's hand, and allows multiple users to simultaneously interact with the detection field 26.
In
In
In
In
In
a, 9b, and 9c illustrate three alternative embodiments for a detection field. In
In
It should also be noted that a fourth dimension can be added to the detection space 126 of
In the previous examples of detection fields and spaces, the detection fields and spaces have always been mapped by Cartesian (x, y, z) coordinates. In
The present invention will be described more particularly in the form of the following two examples. It will be appreciated, however, that there are many other applications in which the interactor methods and systems can be used with good effect.
In
The difference between interactor 152 and the previously described interactor 34 is therefore design related and not computational in nature in that they support different metaphors. With the interactor 152, a doll's head 156 or other talisman is provided with a peg 158 which can engage a hole 160 in the body 154. A small piece of white board 162 is removably attached to the body 154 by a pair of hook-and-pile (e.g. Velcro®) members 164a and 164b. The hook-and-pile member 164a is attached to a surface of body 154 while member 164b is attached to the back of the white board 162. In this way, the white board 162 can be removably attached to the body 154 of the interactor 152. A name, label, or other indicia can be provided on the white board 162 with a marker 166 as illustrated by the name “Fred.” Therefore, the interactor 152 can be used to represent a person named Fred both by means of the head configuration 156 and the name on the white board 162. It is a useful feature of the present invention in that interactors can be given distinct visual, aural or other sensory identities which aid in the metaphor of the human-computer interface.
In
For example, in
In
In
In
The audio server 174 includes a data server 178, a MIDI timepiece 180, a number of MIDI devices 182, and an audio concentrator 184. The data server 178 receives data from a network bus 186 and is connected to the MIDI timepiece 180 by a bus 188. The MIDI timepiece 180 is connected to a rack of MIDI devices 182 by a bus 190, and the output of the MIDI devices 182 are coupled to the concentrator 184 by a bus 192. The concentrator 184 has, as inputs, a number of audio lines 194.
Each workstation 176 includes a computer 196, interfaces 198, and detection fields 200 as described previously. The detection fields 200 can have one or more interactors 202 placed upon their surfaces as previously illustrated and described with reference to
The software operating the interactor system 172 is conceptually illustrated in block diagram form in FIG. 13. The databus 186 carries the data necessary to interconnect the various components of the system 172 and can, for example, be implemented on an Apple LocalTalk or Ethernet network protocol. It should be understood, however, that other network protocols such as Novell Netware or custom network software can also be used to provide the networking functions of the network bus 186.
Three software routines are used to implement the interactor system 172 of the present invention. Namely, each of the workstations 176 operate an application program and a network library, and a data server 178 operates data server software and the network library. The application program 212 runs on the computer 196 of each of the workstations 176 that are part of the interactor system 172. Network libraries 214 likewise each run on a computer system 196. The network library communicates with the network bus 186 via a conceptual link 216 and with the application program via a conceptual link 218. The application program 212 communicates with the network bus 186 via a conceptual link 220. The links 216, 218, and 220 are considered conceptual in that they are not physical links to the bus but, rather, logical links through operating system software, network software, internal buses, network cards, etc.
The software running on the data server 178 includes the network library 222 and the data server software 224. The network library has a conceptual link 226 to the network bus and a conceptual link 228 to the data server software 224. The data server software has a conceptual link 230 to the network bus 186.
In the present implementation, the conceptual links 220 and 230 from the network bus 186 to the application programs 212 and to data server software 224, respectively are AppleEvents created by an Apple networking system. The conceptual links 216 and 226 between the network library and the network bus 186 are preferably standard AppleTalk or Ethernet data packages.
If step 240 determines that the interactor is not in a control space, it is determined in step 246 if the board (i.e. the detection field) is self-embodied. If yes, it is determined in a step 248 if the interactor representing the user (“self”) has been removed from the board. If not, the system provides an audio feedback and a new state to the server in a step 250. If the interactor representing the user has been removed from a self-embodied board, a step 252 provides audio feedback and turns off the sound to all users.
If the event queue detects an interactor being put down on the detection field, a step 254 determines whether it was put down into a control space. If yes, people information is provided in a step 256. If it was put into an assignment space, a step 258 inputs the assignment to the interactor. After either step 256 or 258 are completed, process control is returned to step 238. Next, in a step 260, it is determined whether there is a self-embodied board. If yes, a step 268 determines whether an interactor representing the user has been placed on the detection field. If not, or if step 260 determines that is not a self-embodied board, a step 264 provides audio feedback and resets the data concerning the person represented by the interactor. Otherwise, step 268 determines an interactor representing the user has been placed on the detection field, audio feedback is provided, and a reset of all of the people represented by the interactors on the board is initiated. After steps 264 or 266 is completed, process control is returned to step 238.
In
In
In this second example, an interactor system such as interactor system 24 is controlled to “mark” or “log” events in a videotape. In
As used herein, “temporal flow” will refer to the flow of events, either in real time or in some other time related context. Therefore, either events can be marked in a temporal flow, or events that have been previously recorded or that are being concurrently recorded can be marked in the temporal flow. The “marking” may only be literally temporal (such as in real time), temporal with regard to a specific origin (such as seconds since the start of the tape), or temporal only in the sense that the measure could be translated into a temporal stream (such as feet of tape or frame number). While the present example relates to a recorded video medium, the marking and control of the temporal flow of another medium, such as an audio medium, may also be carried out.
In
Step 324 of
Step 326 of
The step 238 of
The step 310 of
While this invention has been described in terms of several preferred embodiments and two specific examples, there are alterations, permutations, and equivalents which fall within the scope of this invention. It is therefore intended that the following appended claims be interpreted as including all such alterations, permutations, and equivalents as fall within the true spirit and scope of the present invention.
This is a Divisional application of copending prior application Ser. No. 08/801,085 filed on Feb. 14, 1997 now U.S. Pat. No. 6,262,711. This application claims the benefit of copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/692,830, filed Jul. 29, 1996, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/001,875, entitled “Computerized Interactor Systems And Methods For Providing Same,” filed Aug. 3, 1995, each of which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3673327 | Jhonson et al. | Jun 1972 | A |
3891829 | Bobras | Jun 1975 | A |
3894756 | Ward | Jul 1975 | A |
4302011 | Pepper, Jr. | Nov 1981 | A |
4341385 | Doyle et al. | Jul 1982 | A |
4597495 | Knosby | Jul 1986 | A |
4843568 | Krueger et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4873398 | Hubby, Jr. | Oct 1989 | A |
4998010 | Gordon et al. | Mar 1991 | A |
5013047 | Schwab | May 1991 | A |
5047614 | Bianco | Sep 1991 | A |
5082286 | Ryan et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
5088928 | Chan | Feb 1992 | A |
5188368 | Ryan | Feb 1993 | A |
5202828 | Vertelney et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5298731 | Ett | Mar 1994 | A |
5303388 | Kreitman et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5330380 | McDarren et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5337358 | Axelrod et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5396265 | Ulrich et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5452414 | Rosendahl et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5483261 | Yasutake | Jan 1996 | A |
5511148 | Wellner | Apr 1996 | A |
5525798 | Berson et al. | Jun 1996 | A |
5537336 | Joyce | Jul 1996 | A |
5545883 | Sasou et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5550561 | Ziarno | Aug 1996 | A |
5561446 | Montlick | Oct 1996 | A |
5572643 | Judson | Nov 1996 | A |
5586216 | Degen et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5600115 | Balzano | Feb 1997 | A |
5604516 | Herrod et al. | Feb 1997 | A |
5640193 | Wellner | Jun 1997 | A |
5670987 | Doi et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5674003 | Andersen et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5684885 | Cass et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5693693 | Auslander et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5729251 | Nakashima | Mar 1998 | A |
5734373 | Rosenberg et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5739814 | Ohara et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5804803 | Cragun et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5815142 | Allard et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5832119 | Rhoads | Nov 1998 | A |
5841978 | Rhoads | Nov 1998 | A |
5848413 | Wolff | Dec 1998 | A |
5862321 | Lamming et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5862429 | Ueno et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5869819 | Knowles et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5886337 | Rockstein et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5903729 | Reber et al. | May 1999 | A |
6262711 | Cohen et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6282206 | Hindus et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
3008190 | Sep 1981 | DE |
313779 | Nov 1989 | DE |
0576187 | Jun 1992 | EP |
0606790 | Jul 1994 | EP |
2607400 | Nov 1986 | FR |
2103943 | Jul 1981 | GB |
2226468 | Jun 1990 | GB |
2237514 | May 1991 | GB |
4010743 | Jan 1992 | JP |
07093567 | Apr 1995 | JP |
07108786 | Apr 1995 | JP |
09204389 | Aug 1997 | JP |
10171758 | Jun 1998 | JP |
844011 | Jul 1979 | RU |
9216913 | Oct 1992 | WO |
9701137 | Jan 1997 | WO |
9732262 | Sep 1997 | WO |
9803923 | Jan 1998 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20020126085 A1 | Sep 2002 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60001875 | Aug 1995 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 08801085 | Feb 1997 | US |
Child | 09823628 | US |