Using IMUs to Identify Supervisors on Touch Devices

  • Ahmed Kharrufa
  • James Nicholson
  • Paul Dunphy
  • Steve Hodges
  • Pam Briggs
  • Patrick Olivier
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9297)


In addition to their popularity as personal devices, tablets, are becoming increasingly prevalent in work and public settings. In many of these application domains a supervisor user – such as the teacher in a classroom – oversees the function of one or more devices. Access to supervisory functions is typically controlled through the use of a passcode, but experience shows that keeping this passcode secret can be problematic. We introduce SwipeID, a method of identifying supervisor users across a set of touch-based devices by correlating data from a wrist-worn inertial measurement unit (IMU) and a corresponding touchscreen interaction. This approach naturally supports access at the time and point of contact and does not require any additional hardware on the client devices. We describe the design of our system and the challenge-response protocols we have considered. We then present an evaluation study to demonstrate feasibility. Finally we highlight the potential for our scheme to extend to different application domains and input devices.


IMU Association Authentication Touch interaction UI design 



This work was supported by the RCUK Digital Economy Programme- SIDE: Social Inclusion through the Digital Economy EP/G066019/1


  1. 1.
    Accot, J., Zhai, S.: Beyond Fitts’ law: models for trajectory-based HCI tasks. In: Proceedings CHI 1997, pp. 295–302. ACM Press, New York (1997)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    AlAgha, I., Hatch, A., Ma, L., Burd, L.: Towards a teacher-centric approach for multi-touch surfaces in classrooms. In: Proceedings ITS 2010, pp. 187–196. ACM, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    British Educational Suppliers Association (BESA): Tablets and apps in schools 2013. ICT Series, May 2013Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blažica, B., Vladušič, D., Mladenić, D.: MTi: a method for user identification for multitouch displays. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 71(6), 691–702 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Buxton, W.A.: Chunking and phrasing and the design of human-computer dialogues. In: Baecker, R.M., Grudin, J., Buxton, W.A., Greenberg, S. (eds.) Human-Computer Interaction: Toward the Year 2000, pp. 494–499. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Francisco (1995)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, X.A., Grossman, T., Wigdor, D.J., Fitzmaurice, G.: Duet: exploring joint interactions on a smart phone and a smart watch. In: Proceedings CHI 2014, pp. 159–168. ACM Press, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dietz, P., Leigh, D.: DiamondTouch: a multi-user touch technology. Mitsubishi technical report (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Do-Lenh, S.: Supporting reflection and classroom orchestration with tangible tabletops. Ph.D. thesis, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fujinami, K., Pirttikangas, S.: A study on a correlation coefficient to associate an object with its user. In: Proceedings 3rd IET International Conference on Intelligent Environments (IE 2007), pp. 288–295 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harrison, C., Sato, M., Poupyrev, I.: Capacitive fingerprinting: exploring user differentiation by sensing electrical properties of the human body. In: Proceedings UIST 2012, pp. 537–544. ACM Press, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Holmquist, L.E., Mattern, F., Schiele, B., Alahuhta, P., Beigl, M., Gellersen, H.W.: Smart-its friends: a technique for users to easily establish connections between smart artefacts. In: Proceedings Ubicomp 2001, pp. 116–122. ACM Press, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Holz, C., Baudisch, P.: Fiberio: a touchscreen that senses fingerprints. In: Proceedings UIST 2013, pp. 41–50. ACM Press, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kharrufa, A., Balaam, M., Heslop, P., Leat, D., Dolan, P., Olivier, P.: Tables in the wild: lessons learned from a large-scale multi-tabletop deployment. In: Proceedings CHI 2013, pp. 1021–1030, ACM Press (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kharrufa, A., Martinez-Maldonado, A., Kay, J., Olivier, P.: Extending tabletop application design to the classroom. In: Proceedings ITS 2013, pp. 115–124. ACM, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim, D., Dunphy, P., Briggs, P., Hook, J., Nicholson, J.W., Nicholson, J., Olivier, P.: Multi-touch authentication on tabletops. In: Proceedings CHI 2010, pp. 1093–1102. ACM Press, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kreitmayer, S., Rogers, Y., Laney, R., Peake, S.: UniPad: orchestrating collaborative activities through shared tablets and an integrated wall display. In: Proceedings UbiComp 2013, pp. 801–810. ACM Press, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
  18. 18.
    Martinez, R., Collins, A., Kay, J., Yacef, K.: Who did what? Who said that? Collaid: an environment for capturing traces of collaborative learning at the tabletop. In: Proceedings ITS 2011, pp. 172–181. ACM Press, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Martinez-Maldonado, R., Kay, J., Yacef, K., Edbauer, M., Dimitriadis, Y.: MTClassroom and MTDashboard: supporting analysis of teacher attention in an orchestrated multi-tabletop classroom. In: Proceedings CSCL 2013, pp. 320–327 (2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mercier, E., McNaughton, J., Higgins, S., Burd, E., Maldonado, R.M., Clayphan, A.: Interactive surfaces and spaces: a learning sciences agenda. In: ICLS 2012 (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meyer, T., Schmidt, D.: IdWristbands: IR-based user identification on multi-touch surfaces. In: Proceedings ITS 2010, pp. 277–278. ACM Press, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mock, P., Edelmann, J., Schilling, A., Rosenstiel, W.: User identification using raw sensor data from typing on interactive displays. In: Proceedings Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI 2014), pp. 67–72. ACM Press, New York (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Needle, D.: L.A. school district puts the brakes on massive iPad deployment (2014).
  24. 24.
    Patel, S.N., Pierce, J.S., Abowd, G.D.: A gesture-based authentication scheme for untrusted public terminals. In: Proceedings UIST 2004, pp. 157–160. ACM Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pierra, P.: Tablets-in-school galore causes a bandwidth war in Southern California (2014).
  26. 26.
    Ramakers, R., Vanacken, D., Luyten, K., Coninx, K., Schöning, J.: Carpus: a non-intrusive user identification technique for interactive surfaces. In: Proceedings UIST 2012, pp. 35–44. ACM Press, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Reid, D.J.: Spatial involvement and teacher-pupil interaction patterns in school biology laboratories. Educ. Stud. 6(1), 31–41 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Roth, V., Schmidt, P., Güldenring, B.: The IR ring: authenticating users’ touches on a multi-touch display. In: Proceedings UIST 2010, pp. 259–262. ACM Press, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schmidt, D., Chehimi, F., Rukzio, E., Gellersen, H.: PhoneTouch: a technique for direct phone interaction on surfaces. In: Proceedings UIST 2010. pp. 13–16. ACM Press, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Schmidt, D., Chong, M.K., Gellersen, H.: HandsDown: hand-contour-based user identification for interactive surfaces. In: Proceedings of the 6th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Extending Boundaries, pp. 432–441 (2010)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mare, S., Markham, A.M., Cornelius, C., Peterson, R., Kotz, D.: ZEBRA: zero-effort bilateral recurring authentication. In: Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP 2014), pp. 705–720. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2014)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Smith, H.A.: Nonverbal communication in teaching. Rev. Educ. Res. 49(4), 631–672 (1979)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmed Kharrufa
    • 1
  • James Nicholson
    • 1
  • Paul Dunphy
    • 1
  • Steve Hodges
    • 2
  • Pam Briggs
    • 3
  • Patrick Olivier
    • 1
  1. 1.Culture LabNewcastle UniversityNewcastle upon TyneUK
  2. 2.Microsoft ResearchCambridgeUK
  3. 3.PaCT LabNothumbria UniversityNewcastle upon TyneUK

Personalised recommendations