A tangible experiment support system with presentation ambiguity for safe and independent chemistry experiments

  • Akifumi Sokan
  • Ming Wei Hou
  • Norihide Shinagawa
  • Hironori Egi
  • Kaori Fujinami
Original Research

Abstract

We propose a tangible experiment support system that facilitates safe and independent chemistry experiments. For safe experiments, the system displays messages that alert a student to avoid a possible accident based on the operational context. Simultaneously, the system is designed to facilitate active thinking, in which the key concept is multiple interpretations of a message, to avoid dependency on the system in future experiments. The concept of an information presentation with three-dimensional ambiguity, i.e., semantic, spatial and temporal, is presented. A prototype application A3 (A-CUBE) is presented, which extracts various operational contexts in a chemistry experiment from the usage of experimental apparatus and materials. We report the usability experiment and discuss the feasibility of a presentation with ambiguity for active thinking. Additionally, the design principle of a message with semantic ambiguity and future work are presented.

Keywords

Tangible learning Information presentation with ambiguity Avoidance of possible accidents Augmented reality Projector-camera system Chemistry experiments 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We express our thanks to Prof. Wuled Lenggoro and Dr. Mayumi Tsukada for their helpful advice concerning accidents during chemistry experiments. This work was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C) No. 21500117 from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology.

References

  1. Beigl M, Gellersen HW, Schmidt A (2001) MediaCups: experience with design and use of computer-augmented everyday objects. Comput Netw 35(4):401–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Billinghurst M, Kato H, Poupyrev I (2001) The magicbook: a transitional ar interface. Comput Graphics 25:745–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brooke J (1996) SUS: a “quick and dirty” usability scale. In: Jordan PW, Thomas B, Weerdmeester BA, McClelland IL (eds) Usability evaluation in industry. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 189–194Google Scholar
  4. Brumitt B, Meyers B, Krumm J, Kern A, Shafer S (2000) EasyLiving: technologies for intelligent environments. In: Thomas P, Gellersen H-W (eds) Handheld and ubiquitous computing—second international symposium—, HUC 2000, LNCS 1927, Springer, Heidelberg, pp 12–29Google Scholar
  5. Chen Y (2006) A study of comparing the use of augmented reality and physical models in chemistry education. In: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM international conference on Virtual reality continuum and its applications, VRCIA 2006, pp 369–372Google Scholar
  6. Fjeld M, Juchli P, Voegtli B (2003) Chemistry education: a tangible interaction approach. In: Proceedings of the 5th IFIP TC13 conference on human-computer interaction, INTERACT 2003, pp 287–294Google Scholar
  7. Fjeld M, Fredriksson J, Ejdestig M, Duca F, Bötschi K, Voegtli B, Juchli P (2007) Tangible user interface for chemistry education: comparative evaluation and re-design. In: Proceedings of the 25th ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI 2007, pp 805–808Google Scholar
  8. Fujinami K, Nakajima T (2005) Sentient artefact: acquiring user’s context through daily objects. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international symposium on ubiquitous intelligence and smart worlds, UISW 2005, pp 335–344Google Scholar
  9. Gaver H, Bowers J, Boucher A, Law A, Pennington S, Villar N (2006) The history tablecloth: illuminating domestic activity. In: Proceedings of the 6th conference on designing interactive systems, DIS 2006, pp 199–208Google Scholar
  10. Gläser T, Franke J, Wintergerst G, Jagodzinski R (2009) Chemieraum: tangible chemistry in exhibition space. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on tangible and embedded interaction, TEI 2009, pp 285–288Google Scholar
  11. Graschew G, Roelofs TA, Rakowsky S, Schlag PM (2007) From e-learning towards u-learning: ICT-enabled ubiquitous learning & training. In: Proceedings of the 10th IASTED international conference on computers and advanced technology in education, CATE 2007, pp 141–146Google Scholar
  12. Greenberg S, Fitchett S (2001) Phidgets: easy development of physical interfaces through physical widgets. In: Proceedings of the 14th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology, UIST 2001, pp 209–218Google Scholar
  13. Harter A, Hopper A, Steggles P, Ward A, Webster P (1999) The anatomy of a context-aware application. In: Proceedings of the 5th annual international conference on mobile computing, MobiCom 1999, pp 59–68Google Scholar
  14. Intille SS, Lee V, Pinhanez C (2003) Ubiquitous computing in the living room: concept sketches and an implementation of a persistent user interface. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM international conference on ubiquitous computing, UbiComp 2003, pp 265–266Google Scholar
  15. Ishii H, Ullmer B (1997) Tangible Bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms. In: Proceedings of the 15th ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI 1997, pp 234–241Google Scholar
  16. JIS (2002) JIS S 0013. Guidelines for the elderly and people with disabilities—auditory signals on consumer productsGoogle Scholar
  17. JIS (2003) JIS S 0014. Guidelines for the elderly and people with disabilities—auditory signals on consumer products—sound pressure levels of signals for the elderly and in noisy conditionsGoogle Scholar
  18. Karitsuka T, Sato K (2003) A wearable mixed reality with an on-board projector. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE/ACM international symposium on mixed and augmented reality, ISMAR 2003, p 321Google Scholar
  19. Kato H, Billinghurst M, Asano K, Tachibana K (1999) An augmented reality system and its calibration based on marker tracking. Trans Virtual Real Soc Jpn 4(4):607–616Google Scholar
  20. Kidd C, Orr R, Abowd GD, Atkeson CG, Essa IA, MacIntyre B, Mynatt E, Starner TE, Newstetter W (1999) The aware home: a living laboratory for ubiquitous computing experience. In: Streitz NA, Hartkopf V (eds) Cooperative buildings, integrating information, organization, and architecture, second international workshop, CoBuild 1999, LNCS 1670. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 191–198Google Scholar
  21. Lee T, Höllerer T (2007) Initializing markerless tracking using a simple hand gesture. In: Proceedings of the 6th IEEE and ACM international symposium on mixed and augmented reality, ISMAR-2007, pp 1–2Google Scholar
  22. Madden D (2008) CES 2008: DLP shows off working Pico projector prototype. http://www.pocketlint.co.uk/news/news.phtml/12082/13106/pico-projector-prototype-shown-off.phtml. Accessed 15 June 2011
  23. Maekawa T, Yanagisawa Y, Kishino Y, Ishiguro K, Kamei K, Sakurai Y, Okadome T (2010) Object-based activity recognition with heterogeneous sensors on wrist. In: Floréen P, Krüger A, Spasojevic M (eds) The 8th international conference on pervasive computing, pervasive 2010, LNCS 6030. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 246–264Google Scholar
  24. Marshall P (2007) Do tangible interfaces enhance learning? In: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction, TEI 2007, pp 163–170Google Scholar
  25. Otitoju K, Harrison S (2008) Interaction as a component of meaning-making. In: Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Designing interactive systems, DIS 2008, pp 193–202Google Scholar
  26. Pinhanez C (2001) The everywhere displays projector: a device to create ubiquitous graphical interfaces. In: Abowd GD, Brumitt B, Shafer S (eds) The 3rd ACM international conference on ubiquitous computing, UbiComp 2001, LNCS 2201. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 315–331Google Scholar
  27. Pinhanez C, Podlaseck M (2005) To frame or not to frame: the role and design of frameless displays in ubiquitous applications. In: Beigl M, Intille SS, Rekimoto J, Tokuda H (eds) The 7th ACM international conference on ubiquitous computing, UbiComp 2005, LNCS 3660. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 340–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Podlaseck M, Pinhanez C, Alvarado N, Chan M, Dejesus E (2003) On interfaces projected onto real-world objects. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2003 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, CHI EA 2003, pp 802–803Google Scholar
  29. Raffle HS, Parkes AJ, Ishii H (2004) Topobo: a constructive assembly system with kinetic memory. In: Proceedings of the 22th ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI 2004, pp 647–654Google Scholar
  30. Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. Rick J, Rogers Y, Haig C, Yuill N (2009) Learning by doing with shareable interfaces. Child Youth Environ 19(1):321–342Google Scholar
  32. Sakamoto M, Matsuishi M (2008) Hands-on training for chemistry laboratory in a ubiquitous computing environment. In: Proceedings of the 2008 IEEE international conference on sensor networks, ubiquitous, and trustworthy computing, SUTC 2008, pp 561–563Google Scholar
  33. Sengers P, Gaver B (2006) Staying open to interpretation: engaging multiple meanings in designand evaluation. In: Proceedings of the 6th conference on designing interactive systems, DIS 2006, pp 99–108Google Scholar
  34. Wilson A (2005) PlayAnywhere: a compact interactive tabletop projection-vision system. In: Proceedings of the 18th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, UIST 2005, pp 83–92Google Scholar
  35. Yamahara H, Takada H, Shimakawa H (2007) Behavior detection based on touched objects with dynamic threshold determination model. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European conference on Smart sensing and context, EuroSSC 2007, pp 142–158Google Scholar
  36. Zuckerman O, Arida S, Resnick M (2005) Extending tangible interfaces for education: digital montessori-inspired manipulatives. In: Proceedings of the 23th ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, CHI 2005, pp 859–868Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Akifumi Sokan
    • 1
  • Ming Wei Hou
    • 1
  • Norihide Shinagawa
    • 1
  • Hironori Egi
    • 2
  • Kaori Fujinami
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer and Information SciencesTokyo University of Agriculture and TechnologyTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Information Media CenterTokyo University of Agriculture and TechnologyTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations