Simple vs. Compound Mark Hierarchical Marking Menus

1
Simple vs. Compound Mark Hierarchical Marking
Menus

• Shengdong Zhao, Ravin Balakrishnan

2
Compound Mark Technique
3
Compound Mark Technique
4
Compound Mark Technique
5
Compound Mark Technique
6
Compound Mark Technique
7
Compound Mark Technique
8
Advantages

• Seamless novice to expert transition

9
Advantages

• Seamless novice to expert transition
• 3.5 x faster than linear menus

10
Advantages

• Seamless novice to expert transition
• 3.5 x faster than linear menus
• Scale invariance

11
Limitations Error Rate

• Breadth/depth/speed/accuracy trade-off
• Kurtenbach and Buxton, 1993

Compass4
12
Limitations Error Rate

• Breadth/depth/speed/accuracy trade-off
• Kurtenbach and Buxton, 1993

Compass4
Compass4-4
13
Limitations Error Rate

• Breadth/depth/speed/accuracy trade-off
• Kurtenbach and Buxton, 1993

Compass8
14
Limitations Error Rate

• Breadth/depth/speed/accuracy trade-off
• Kurtenbach and Buxton, 1993

Compass8
Compass8-2
15
Limitations Ambiguous Marks
S-S-N
16
Limitations Ambiguous Marks
S-S-N S-N-N
17
Limitations Ambiguous Marks
S-S-N S-N-N
compass8-3 22 ambiguous compass4-4 57
ambiguous
18
Limitations Physical Space
19
Compound Mark Technique
20
Simple Mark Technique
21
Simple Mark Technique
22
Simple Mark Technique
23
Simple Mark Technique
24
Simple Mark Technique
25
Simple Mark Technique
26
Simple Mark Technique
27
Compound vs. Simple
Compound Mark Technique Simple Mark Technique
Breadth vs. Depth Compass4max. depth 4 Compass8max. depth 2 Possibly more depth
Ambiguity Yes NO
Space usage Grows quadratically Theoretical constant
Physical Motion Single zig-zag stroke Multiple simple strokes
28
Compound vs. Simple
Compound Mark Technique Simple Mark Technique
Breadth vs. Depth Compass4max. depth 4 Compass8max. depth 2 Possibly more depth
Ambiguity Yes NO
Space usage Grows quadratically Theoretical constant
Physical Motion Single zig-zag stroke Multiple simple strokes
29
Compound vs. Simple
Compound Mark Technique Simple Mark Technique
Breadth vs. Depth Compass4max. depth 4 Compass8max. depth 2 Possibly more depth
Ambiguity Yes NO
Space usage Grows quadratically Theoretical constant
Physical Motion Single zig-zag stroke Multiple simple strokes
30
Compound vs. Simple
Compound Mark Technique Simple Mark Technique
Breadth vs. Depth Compass4max. depth 4 Compass8max. depth 2 Possibly more depth
Ambiguity Yes NO
Space usage Grows quadratically Theoretical constant
Physical Motion Single zig-zag stroke Multiple simple strokes
31
Research Issues
Speed and accuracy
Hierarchy depth
Input footprint
Spatial overlap
Timeout threshold
32
Experimental Setup
33
Input Footprint
1.25 x 1.25
3.5 x 4.25
7.8 x 8.8
34
Experimental Design
35
Experimental Design

• 12 participants x

36
Experimental Design

• 12 participants x
• 2 techniques (compound, simple) x

37
Experimental Design

• 12 participants x
• 2 techniques (compound, simple) x
• 3 input footprint (small, medium, large) x

38
Experimental Design

• 12 participants x
• 2 techniques (compound, simple) x
• 3 input footprint (small, medium, large) x
• 4 layouts (compass4-2, 4-3 , 8-2 , 8-3)

39
Experimental Design

• 12 participants x
• 2 techniques (compound, simple) x
• 3 input footprint (small, medium, large) x
• 4 layouts (compass4-2, 4-3 , 8-2 , 8-3)
• 9216 menu selections in total.

40
Accuracy
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Accuracy()
4,2 4,3 8,2 8,3 4,2 4,3 8,2 8,3 4,2 4,3
8,2 8,3
Menu Layout (breadth, depth)
Overall Compound (80) vs. Simple (93)
41
Accuracy
100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0
Off On Mix Off On Mix Off On Mix Off On Mix Off On
Mix Off On Mix
Accuracy()
Level 2 Level 3 Level 2 Level 3 Level 2
Level 3
Large
Medium
Small
42
Speed
4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0
Time (in second)
4,2 4,3 8,2 8,3 4,2 4,3 8,2 8,3 4,2 4,3
8,2 8,3
Menu Layout (breadth, depth)
43
Speed
Off On Mix Off On Mix Off On Mix Off On Mix Off On
Mix Off On Mix
5 4 3 2 1 0
Time (in second)
Level 2 Level 3 Level 2 Level 3 Level 2
Level 3
Large
Medium
Small
44
Input Space Usage
45
Results Summary

• Faster, more accurate
• Increased hierarchy depth
• Mark direction no effect on accuracy
• Unaffected by input footprint
• Space efficient
• Timeout threshold 2s upper bound

46
Menu Transition Alternatives
47
Backtracking Alternatives
48
Future Directions

• Novice to expert transition
• Mode errors

49
Acknowledgements

• Mark Chignell, Michael McGuffin,
• Jingnan Yang, Xiao Wu, Faye Baron, Rick Bodner
• Experiment participants
• Members of DGP and MIE lab
• UIST Reviewers

50
Questions
51
Formula for Calculating Ambiguity

• Let B be the branching factor of the menu (e.g.,
  4, 8)
• Let D be the depth of the menu (i.e., number of
  levels)
• Then, the total number of leaf nodes BD
• Number of leaf nodes with unambiguous marks
• (number of marks with maximal number D-1
  inflections)
• (number of marks with no inflections at all)
• B(B-1)(D-1) B
• Example calculations
• compass8-2 layout 8(71) 8 64 (i.e., all
  leaves)
• compass4-4 layout 4(33) 4 112 (43 of all
  leaves)
• compass8-3 layout 8(72) 8 400 (78 of
  all leaves)

52
Drawing Time
Reaction Time
53
Drawing Time
Reaction Time
54
Experimental Setup