Monte carlo methods for managing interactive state, action and feedback under uncertainty

Current input handling systems provide effective techniques for modeling, tracking, interpreting, and acting on user input. However, new interaction technologies violate the standard assumption that input is certain. Touch, speech recognition, gestural input, and sensors for context often produce uncertain estimates of user inputs. Current systems tend to remove uncertainty early on. However, information available in the user interface and application can help to resolve uncertainty more appropriately for the end user. This paper presents a set of techniques for tracking the state of interactive objects in the presence of uncertain inputs. These techniques use a Monte Carlo approach to maintain a probabilistically accurate description of the user interface that can be used to make informed choices about actions. Samples are used to approximate the distribution of possible inputs, possible interactor states that result from inputs, and possible actions (callbacks and feedback) interactors may execute. Because each sample is certain, the developer can specify most of the behavior of interactors in a familiar, non-probabilistic fashion. This approach retains all the advantages of maintaining information about uncertainty while minimizing the need for the developer to work in probabilistic terms. We present a working implementation of our framework and illustrate the power of these techniques within a paint program that includes three different kinds of uncertain input.

[1]  Scott E. Hudson,et al.  Probabilistic state machines: dialog management for inputs with uncertainty , 1992, UIST '92.

[2]  Robert J. K. Jacob,et al.  A software model and specification language for non-WIMP user interfaces , 1999, TCHI.

[3]  Sharon L. Oviatt,et al.  Ten myths of multimodal interaction , 1999, Commun. ACM.

[4]  Anthony I. Wasserman,et al.  Extending State Transition Diagrams for the Specification of Human–Computer Interaction , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[5]  Neil J. Gordon,et al.  A tutorial on particle filters for online nonlinear/non-Gaussian Bayesian tracking , 2002, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[6]  Takeo Igarashi,et al.  A negotiation architecture for fluid documents , 1998, UIST '98.

[7]  Sharon L. Oviatt,et al.  Multimodal Interfaces: A Survey of Principles, Models and Frameworks , 2009, Human Machine Interaction.

[8]  Olivier Bau,et al.  OctoPocus: a dynamic guide for learning gesture-based command sets , 2008, UIST '08.

[9]  Jj Odell,et al.  The Use of Context in Large Vocabulary Speech Recognition , 1995 .

[10]  Dan R. Olsen,et al.  Propositional production systems for dialog description , 1990, CHI '90.

[11]  Denis Lalanne,et al.  Strengths and weaknesses of software architectures for the rapid creation of tangible and multimodal interfaces , 2008, Tangible and Embedded Interaction.

[12]  Brad A. Myers,et al.  Reusable hierarchical command objects , 1996, CHI.

[13]  Gregory D. Abowd,et al.  Providing integrated toolkit-level support for ambiguity in recognition-based interfaces , 2000, CHI.

[14]  N. Gordon,et al.  Novel approach to nonlinear/non-Gaussian Bayesian state estimation , 1993 .

[15]  Marie-Luce Bourguet,et al.  A Toolkit for Creating and Testing Multimodal Interface Designs , 2002 .

[16]  N. Metropolis,et al.  The Monte Carlo method. , 1949 .

[17]  Scott E. Hudson,et al.  A framework for robust and flexible handling of inputs with uncertainty , 2010, UIST.