Comments:
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: The why UI: using goal networks to improve user interfaces
Author: Dustin A. Smith, Henry LiebermanVenue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
This short paper presents ToDoGo, a "mobile, location-aware to-do list application [...] which uses goal networks to help users plan where and when to accomplish their desired goals." The group analyzed which plans and goals users prefer or tend to choose. With that information, they could perform tendency analysis so users with similar patterns as previous entries could be helped along. More specifically, the goals could be labeled as "worth doing" or "not worth doing." These classifications were based on the previous history of similar users. To input the goals, the users inputed text into an interface, and the program mined the text for the information. This was done using the same framework as 43things.com, which is the website that inspired this project. The program then creates a goal graph from the mined text information. Lastly, the group implemented a location-based map that takes goals and shows the user where they can accomplish these goals near their current location. Since ToDoGo is a mobile application, this can be difficult because they have to get the location every time the application is launched, then compare the goals with the stores or locations nearby. A sample goal graph is given below.
Discussion:
I thought this was pretty interesting. I could see some people using this, especially if they can try it out for free. I think that would be the best way for this group to penetrate the potential market. I'm not sure if I'd use it myself, but for people who have long lists of things to do, I could definitely see this as being useful. I probably will check later to see if this has actually been launched. If so, I may try it out myself.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
Living With Complexity
Summary:
Complexity is necessary because our lives and the things we do are complex. However, complex does not mean difficult; rather, that is the definition of complicated that Norman uses. The key is eliminating unnecessary complexity which can lead to complications or confusion.
Simplicity is not the answer. Humans say that they want things simple, but yet prefer to buy items with more features and buttons. Perceived complexity decreases as the user becomes more experienced with the particular item or system.
Simple things aren't always so simple. When multiple simple things are combined, like passwords for several different things, the task suddenly becomes very complex. The solution is to put the information in the world rather than in our heads.
Different signals mean different things to different cultures. Designs should be made to reduce the impact of these social differences, such as adding an S or P to salt and pepper shakers. Social signifiers are what allow people to "follow the crowd" so they know what is the proper action to take.Discussion:
I'm so sick of reading Donald Norman books. He is just a boring writer. I don't think anything he writes is that useful. The idea of affordances is really the only useful thing. This book was pretty awful. As it always is with Norman, it was very repetitive and boring. My favorite part by far was when he said his own university thinks he's a crackpot. Easily the best moment of all his books. He makes some good points in this book, but could have reduced the number of pages by at least half. Overall, I would never read this book again, and will try to sell all of Norman's books on Amazon shortly. I don't even want to see them again.
Monday, April 25, 2011
Book Reading #52 - Living With Complexity
Chapter 3: How Simple Things Can Complicate Our Mind
Summary:
Simple things aren't always so simple. When multiple simple things are combined, like passwords for several different things, the task suddenly becomes very complex. The solution is to put the information in the world rather than in our heads.
Chapter 4: Social Signifiers
Summary:
Different signals mean different things to different cultures. Designs should be made to reduce the impact of these social differences, such as adding an S or P to salt and pepper shakers. Social signifiers are what allow people to "follow the crowd" so they know what is the proper action to take.
Discussion:
I thought it was hilarious when Norman said his own university thinks he's a crackpot. Best part of the chapter (and book overall) by far. I must admit that the third chapter was a little better because Norman used more interesting examples. The fourth chapter was pretty awful. Social signifiers are important, but very boring to read about. I think one could easily say that experience is what determines the significance/meaning of the signifiers anyways.
Summary:
Simple things aren't always so simple. When multiple simple things are combined, like passwords for several different things, the task suddenly becomes very complex. The solution is to put the information in the world rather than in our heads.
Chapter 4: Social Signifiers
Summary:
Different signals mean different things to different cultures. Designs should be made to reduce the impact of these social differences, such as adding an S or P to salt and pepper shakers. Social signifiers are what allow people to "follow the crowd" so they know what is the proper action to take.
Discussion:
I thought it was hilarious when Norman said his own university thinks he's a crackpot. Best part of the chapter (and book overall) by far. I must admit that the third chapter was a little better because Norman used more interesting examples. The fourth chapter was pretty awful. Social signifiers are important, but very boring to read about. I think one could easily say that experience is what determines the significance/meaning of the signifiers anyways.
Thursday, April 21, 2011
Media Equation
Summary:
These three papers delved into the notion of treating computers as humans, thus complicating the notion of "human-computer" interaction. When computers were polite or helpful, users tried to reciprocate. In a sense, they tried to treat the computer how the computer treated them. This is a very human-human notion, and the fact that the users extended this to computers is surprising. Furthermore, the users all stated after the experiments that computers did not deserve the same treatment as people because they are not human or even living. Additionally, when computers demonstrated personality traits similar to those of the user, the user generally favored that computer and had better experiences with it. In a sense, users wanted computers not only with personalities, but with personalities that they considered likable.
Discussion:
I actually liked these readings. They were a bit long and drug on a bit, but nonetheless I found the material and topic to be very interesting. I never considered how humans treat computers with the same social norms that we treat other humans. I also never considered a computer that actually had a personality. I think this brings a whole new aspect to "human-computer" interaction for me. Not only should I make a good system, but I should make one that is likable and treats the user well. If I do this, then I'm more likely to have positive reviews and feedback. I would never have expected the users in these studies to act the way they did. Overall I'd say this was a must-read for this class and very interesting.
These three papers delved into the notion of treating computers as humans, thus complicating the notion of "human-computer" interaction. When computers were polite or helpful, users tried to reciprocate. In a sense, they tried to treat the computer how the computer treated them. This is a very human-human notion, and the fact that the users extended this to computers is surprising. Furthermore, the users all stated after the experiments that computers did not deserve the same treatment as people because they are not human or even living. Additionally, when computers demonstrated personality traits similar to those of the user, the user generally favored that computer and had better experiences with it. In a sense, users wanted computers not only with personalities, but with personalities that they considered likable.
Discussion:
I actually liked these readings. They were a bit long and drug on a bit, but nonetheless I found the material and topic to be very interesting. I never considered how humans treat computers with the same social norms that we treat other humans. I also never considered a computer that actually had a personality. I think this brings a whole new aspect to "human-computer" interaction for me. Not only should I make a good system, but I should make one that is likable and treats the user well. If I do this, then I'm more likely to have positive reviews and feedback. I would never have expected the users in these studies to act the way they did. Overall I'd say this was a must-read for this class and very interesting.
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Paper Reading #24
Comments:
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Finding Your Way in a Multi-dimensional Semantic Space with Luminoso
Author: Robert Speer, Catherine Havasi, Nichole Treadway, Henry Lieberman
Venue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
Luminoso is an interactive system that helps researchers form correlations between words. It reads in text documents, then the user "grabs" a point of reference. From that, it allows the researchers to rotate their viewpoint in N-dimensional space. Thus, Luminoso is a form of data mining. Other similar algorithms that are automated will create useless or irrelevant relations between words, but since a user guides Luminoso, these are eliminated, giving the system a sort of "common sense." The group believes Luminoso could be useful in the creation of semantic networks, such as biological or medical informational resources, "by providing a visualizer which shows the layout, focus, and coverage of the developing resource." The picture below is an example of a similar program.
Discussion:
Another short paper makes me very happy. I think my luck runs out after this one though. Nonetheless, this paper I thought was very confusing. I didn't feel that it was particularly well organized which made it difficult to follow. I also didn't think the concepts were well explained until the end of the paper, requiring me to try and read the paper a second time. The concept seems alright, but again poorly explained. I don't think this will ever amount to anything because of such a small target market.
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Finding Your Way in a Multi-dimensional Semantic Space with Luminoso
Author: Robert Speer, Catherine Havasi, Nichole Treadway, Henry Lieberman
Venue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
Luminoso is an interactive system that helps researchers form correlations between words. It reads in text documents, then the user "grabs" a point of reference. From that, it allows the researchers to rotate their viewpoint in N-dimensional space. Thus, Luminoso is a form of data mining. Other similar algorithms that are automated will create useless or irrelevant relations between words, but since a user guides Luminoso, these are eliminated, giving the system a sort of "common sense." The group believes Luminoso could be useful in the creation of semantic networks, such as biological or medical informational resources, "by providing a visualizer which shows the layout, focus, and coverage of the developing resource." The picture below is an example of a similar program.
Discussion:
Another short paper makes me very happy. I think my luck runs out after this one though. Nonetheless, this paper I thought was very confusing. I didn't feel that it was particularly well organized which made it difficult to follow. I also didn't think the concepts were well explained until the end of the paper, requiring me to try and read the paper a second time. The concept seems alright, but again poorly explained. I don't think this will ever amount to anything because of such a small target market.
Why We Make Mistakes
Summary:
People make a variety of mistakes for a variety of different reasons. This book attempts to explain those reasons in the hopes that we can possibly avoid them.
People generally don't remember names because of the lack of meaning. However, people do remember faces. There have been over 200 convicted criminals released because they were found innocent by DNA evidence, and 77% of them were identified by the eyewitnesses.
Humans can make decisions based on things we do not notice or see. For example, strippers earn more according to where they are in their fertility cycle. Also colors, such as black, have an impact on how we make a decision. Finally people generally believe that one should not change answers on a test from the first answer, even though this is proven to be incorrect, and additionally people regret changing these answers more so than not changing them.
Humans recall experiences of their actions more favorably than what actually happens. Disclosing bias does not do anything to eliminate the effects of that bias, and sometimes even makes the result worse. Several examples of how people do not remember their role in events are examined, most notably test scores and John Dean's role in Watergate.
People are terrible at "multi-tasking," which is a myth anyways. In spite of this fact, cars are becoming increasingly distracting. Distraction caused 78% of all car accidents with a camera in the car, and 65% of all near accidents.
Our frame of mind, or frame of reference, is a key part in our interactions. For example, the first offer in negotiations, such as the listing price of a house, becomes the anchor, or frame of reference, for all future offers. Also, we don't notice when grocery stores charge more for non-sale items after advertising a sale.
Humans tend to not notice the finer details when doing something that is routine to them or that they've done many times before. As a result, newspapers are constantly printing mistakes, and music sight readers will miss errors in the notes. Also, the book provides an example of a woman hanging herself in her tree on Halloween, and people not noticing because they thought it was a decoration.
People remember things as much "cleaner" than they were in reality. For example, people remember rivers, states, streets, etc as much straighter than they really are. Also, humans will alter stories so they make sense in their mind, even to great lengths. Finally, how much we remember is greatly limited, and we also will believe our own outright fibs if it fits the impression in our own mind.
The main difference between men and women is the level of confidence. Men are more confident in themselves, which leads to better navigation, debugging, and social skills. Men will over estimate how well they did, why women will under estimate their performance. The role of tinkering and exploring as children can lead to these results.
People are incredibly over confident. This is displayed in confidence tests, gym memberships, and other tests of one's skill. Information overload helps confidence, but doesn't affect outcomes.
We don't read instructions. We'd rather just do it our own way. Experts are classified as such because they spend thousands upon thousands of hours practicing. Cognitive maps are a key way animals solve problems, as we're always looking for the shortest path to "get the cheese."
Objects are created with constraints and affordances that limit or cue proper use. If objects are not properly constrained or given the proper affordances, serious errors can occur. For example, herapin overdoses due to too many similarities in the labels have affected thousands, including Dennis Quaid and his family. The aviation industry is much better at eliminating these types of errors than the medical field because of better naming and differing attitudes towards accepting advice.
Millions of people move out to California every year because they believe they will be happier, but it turns out that the things we focus on tend to not make us as happy as we would expect. Handicapped people are generally very satisified with their life, but most people wouldn't expect that. Finality allows for adaptation, while the option for a "grass is greener" scenario can hamper happiness.
Discussion:
I really liked this book. I know I make a lot of the same mistakes listed in the book without even thinking about it. I really liked how the author used a lot of specific "real-world" examples to demonstrate his points, rather than just saying that such-and-such mistake is common, ala Donald Norman. A lot of the things the author classifies as mistakes, I would never have thought of as mistakes, such as over confidence. I understand how it can lead to mistakes, but I feel now that it can be a mistake in and of itself. Also, this book really demonstrates how inter-related all aspects of our lives and interactions can be. I liked how he showed that people believe themselves to be better looking and more accurate than they really are. It made me try to evaluate myself a little more objectively. Lastly, I really try to avoid doing anything in my car while I'm driving now because of this book. Overall, I really liked this book and would recommend it in the future.
People make a variety of mistakes for a variety of different reasons. This book attempts to explain those reasons in the hopes that we can possibly avoid them.
People generally don't remember names because of the lack of meaning. However, people do remember faces. There have been over 200 convicted criminals released because they were found innocent by DNA evidence, and 77% of them were identified by the eyewitnesses.
Humans can make decisions based on things we do not notice or see. For example, strippers earn more according to where they are in their fertility cycle. Also colors, such as black, have an impact on how we make a decision. Finally people generally believe that one should not change answers on a test from the first answer, even though this is proven to be incorrect, and additionally people regret changing these answers more so than not changing them.
Humans recall experiences of their actions more favorably than what actually happens. Disclosing bias does not do anything to eliminate the effects of that bias, and sometimes even makes the result worse. Several examples of how people do not remember their role in events are examined, most notably test scores and John Dean's role in Watergate.
People are terrible at "multi-tasking," which is a myth anyways. In spite of this fact, cars are becoming increasingly distracting. Distraction caused 78% of all car accidents with a camera in the car, and 65% of all near accidents.
Our frame of mind, or frame of reference, is a key part in our interactions. For example, the first offer in negotiations, such as the listing price of a house, becomes the anchor, or frame of reference, for all future offers. Also, we don't notice when grocery stores charge more for non-sale items after advertising a sale.
Humans tend to not notice the finer details when doing something that is routine to them or that they've done many times before. As a result, newspapers are constantly printing mistakes, and music sight readers will miss errors in the notes. Also, the book provides an example of a woman hanging herself in her tree on Halloween, and people not noticing because they thought it was a decoration.
People remember things as much "cleaner" than they were in reality. For example, people remember rivers, states, streets, etc as much straighter than they really are. Also, humans will alter stories so they make sense in their mind, even to great lengths. Finally, how much we remember is greatly limited, and we also will believe our own outright fibs if it fits the impression in our own mind.
The main difference between men and women is the level of confidence. Men are more confident in themselves, which leads to better navigation, debugging, and social skills. Men will over estimate how well they did, why women will under estimate their performance. The role of tinkering and exploring as children can lead to these results.
People are incredibly over confident. This is displayed in confidence tests, gym memberships, and other tests of one's skill. Information overload helps confidence, but doesn't affect outcomes.
We don't read instructions. We'd rather just do it our own way. Experts are classified as such because they spend thousands upon thousands of hours practicing. Cognitive maps are a key way animals solve problems, as we're always looking for the shortest path to "get the cheese."
Objects are created with constraints and affordances that limit or cue proper use. If objects are not properly constrained or given the proper affordances, serious errors can occur. For example, herapin overdoses due to too many similarities in the labels have affected thousands, including Dennis Quaid and his family. The aviation industry is much better at eliminating these types of errors than the medical field because of better naming and differing attitudes towards accepting advice.
Millions of people move out to California every year because they believe they will be happier, but it turns out that the things we focus on tend to not make us as happy as we would expect. Handicapped people are generally very satisified with their life, but most people wouldn't expect that. Finality allows for adaptation, while the option for a "grass is greener" scenario can hamper happiness.
Discussion:
I really liked this book. I know I make a lot of the same mistakes listed in the book without even thinking about it. I really liked how the author used a lot of specific "real-world" examples to demonstrate his points, rather than just saying that such-and-such mistake is common, ala Donald Norman. A lot of the things the author classifies as mistakes, I would never have thought of as mistakes, such as over confidence. I understand how it can lead to mistakes, but I feel now that it can be a mistake in and of itself. Also, this book really demonstrates how inter-related all aspects of our lives and interactions can be. I liked how he showed that people believe themselves to be better looking and more accurate than they really are. It made me try to evaluate myself a little more objectively. Lastly, I really try to avoid doing anything in my car while I'm driving now because of this book. Overall, I really liked this book and would recommend it in the future.
Book Reading #51 - Living With Complexity
Chapter 1: Why Is Complexity Necessary? Summary:
Complexity is necessary because our lives and the things we do are complex. However, complex does not mean difficult; rather, that is the definition of complicated that Norman uses. The key is eliminating unnecessary complexity which can lead to complications or confusion.
Chapter 2: Simplicity is in the Mind
Summary:
Simplicity is not the answer. Humans say that they want things simple, but yet prefer to buy items with more features and buttons. Perceived complexity decreases as the user becomes more experienced with the particular item or system.
Discussion:I couldn't get over how he got the in field fly rule wrong for baseball. When the ball is in the air, runners stay on base. Thus, if the fielder dropped the ball on purpose, he could easily turn a double or even triple play. Also, this is only when there are runners on first, first and second, or bases loaded, because of the force out rules. Other than that, I hate Norman. He's redundant and boring.
The second chapter is alright. I feel as though I've read the part about conceptual models three times now. I agree that simplicity is perceived and not usually a good thing. I did chuckle about the automated washer still having lots of buttons to make it look better.
Complexity is necessary because our lives and the things we do are complex. However, complex does not mean difficult; rather, that is the definition of complicated that Norman uses. The key is eliminating unnecessary complexity which can lead to complications or confusion.
Chapter 2: Simplicity is in the Mind
Summary:
Simplicity is not the answer. Humans say that they want things simple, but yet prefer to buy items with more features and buttons. Perceived complexity decreases as the user becomes more experienced with the particular item or system.
Discussion:I couldn't get over how he got the in field fly rule wrong for baseball. When the ball is in the air, runners stay on base. Thus, if the fielder dropped the ball on purpose, he could easily turn a double or even triple play. Also, this is only when there are runners on first, first and second, or bases loaded, because of the force out rules. Other than that, I hate Norman. He's redundant and boring.
The second chapter is alright. I feel as though I've read the part about conceptual models three times now. I agree that simplicity is perceived and not usually a good thing. I did chuckle about the automated washer still having lots of buttons to make it look better.
Tuesday, April 19, 2011
Book Reading #50 - Why We Make Mistakes
Chapter 12: We Don’t Constrain Ourselves
Summary:
Objects are created with constraints and affordances that limit or cue proper use. If objects are not properly constrained or given the proper affordances, serious errors can occur. For example, herapin overdoses due to too many similarities in the labels have affected thousands, including Dennis Quaid and his family. The aviation industry is much better at eliminating these types of errors than the medical field because of better naming and differing attitudes towards accepting advice.
Chapter 13: The Grass Does Look Greener
Summary:
Millions of people move out to California every year because they believe they will be happier, but it turns out that the things we focus on tend to not make us as happy as we would expect. Handicapped people are generally very satisified with their life, but most people wouldn't expect that. Finality allows for adaptation, while the option for a "grass is greener" scenario can hamper happiness.
Conclusion:
Summary:
This basically brings all the chapters into one synopsis. The author provides suggestions on how to avoid all the causes of mistakes. Also he discusses the importance of sleep.
Discussion:
The first chapter is very similar to the stuff Norman wrote. I think the concept of constraints and affordances are too closely linked to be labeled differently. For example, I don't think scissors constrain the way we use them, but rather the holes provide cues/affordances on how to use them correctly.
I thought the part about handicapped and disabled people being happier was really eye-opening. I never would have thought that at all. I also liked the bit about how people with the option to do something else generally are less happy, even though I would think it to be the other way around. I don't understand why so many people would want to live in California. But to every man his own I guess.
The conclusion I thought was fitting. I was especially interested in the part about sleep. I liked how he highlighted the important examples in the book, as those were what made the book enjoyable to begin with for me.
Summary:
Objects are created with constraints and affordances that limit or cue proper use. If objects are not properly constrained or given the proper affordances, serious errors can occur. For example, herapin overdoses due to too many similarities in the labels have affected thousands, including Dennis Quaid and his family. The aviation industry is much better at eliminating these types of errors than the medical field because of better naming and differing attitudes towards accepting advice.
Chapter 13: The Grass Does Look Greener
Summary:
Millions of people move out to California every year because they believe they will be happier, but it turns out that the things we focus on tend to not make us as happy as we would expect. Handicapped people are generally very satisified with their life, but most people wouldn't expect that. Finality allows for adaptation, while the option for a "grass is greener" scenario can hamper happiness.
Conclusion:
Summary:
This basically brings all the chapters into one synopsis. The author provides suggestions on how to avoid all the causes of mistakes. Also he discusses the importance of sleep.
Discussion:
The first chapter is very similar to the stuff Norman wrote. I think the concept of constraints and affordances are too closely linked to be labeled differently. For example, I don't think scissors constrain the way we use them, but rather the holes provide cues/affordances on how to use them correctly.
I thought the part about handicapped and disabled people being happier was really eye-opening. I never would have thought that at all. I also liked the bit about how people with the option to do something else generally are less happy, even though I would think it to be the other way around. I don't understand why so many people would want to live in California. But to every man his own I guess.
The conclusion I thought was fitting. I was especially interested in the part about sleep. I liked how he highlighted the important examples in the book, as those were what made the book enjoyable to begin with for me.
Paper Reading #23
Comments:
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Evaluating Automatic Warning Cues for Visual Search in Vascular Images
Author: Boris W. van Schooten, Betsy M.A.G. van Dijk, Anton Nijholt, Johan H.C. Reiber
Venue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
This group conducted an experiment using MRA images to analyze the effects of visual searches. Namely, the aim was to determine the level of detriment or effeciency in a false positive, false negative, no suspicious areas, and perfect detection situation. The users were presented with images of vessels, and they were supposed to verify the automatic segmentation. They "compared user time and error performance as well as subjective preference for the following conditions: no warning highlights, only false positives (paranoid), only false negatives (conservative), and perfect highlighting." The results indicated that the users performed significantly faster with the paranoid highlighting than with no highlighting. On top of that, they made less errors as well, although by a relatively insignificant margin. Lastly, the group found that the users preferred the presence of suspicious areas over no suspicious areas, and "appear" to prefer paranoid over conservative highlighting. This is very different than what has been found in other similar studies. Other studies showed detrimental effects for false positive rates approximately the same as in this study, but this experiment indicates some potential positive effects for those false positives. Figure 1 shows an example from the experiment.
Discussion:
This was my first or second short paper, and I basked in all its glory. The experiment was easy to understand, so I think the author did a good job explaining it. I feel sorry for the people who had to participate in the study because this seemed like a pretty boring experiment to take part of. Since visual search is so common, whether it be in airports, medical fields, or even the military, I can see how this type of study could be useful. I would be interested in seeing if other groups could replicate these results on larger scales and with different applications.
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Evaluating Automatic Warning Cues for Visual Search in Vascular Images
Author: Boris W. van Schooten, Betsy M.A.G. van Dijk, Anton Nijholt, Johan H.C. Reiber
Venue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
This group conducted an experiment using MRA images to analyze the effects of visual searches. Namely, the aim was to determine the level of detriment or effeciency in a false positive, false negative, no suspicious areas, and perfect detection situation. The users were presented with images of vessels, and they were supposed to verify the automatic segmentation. They "compared user time and error performance as well as subjective preference for the following conditions: no warning highlights, only false positives (paranoid), only false negatives (conservative), and perfect highlighting." The results indicated that the users performed significantly faster with the paranoid highlighting than with no highlighting. On top of that, they made less errors as well, although by a relatively insignificant margin. Lastly, the group found that the users preferred the presence of suspicious areas over no suspicious areas, and "appear" to prefer paranoid over conservative highlighting. This is very different than what has been found in other similar studies. Other studies showed detrimental effects for false positive rates approximately the same as in this study, but this experiment indicates some potential positive effects for those false positives. Figure 1 shows an example from the experiment.
This was my first or second short paper, and I basked in all its glory. The experiment was easy to understand, so I think the author did a good job explaining it. I feel sorry for the people who had to participate in the study because this seemed like a pretty boring experiment to take part of. Since visual search is so common, whether it be in airports, medical fields, or even the military, I can see how this type of study could be useful. I would be interested in seeing if other groups could replicate these results on larger scales and with different applications.
Monday, April 18, 2011
Final Project Proposal
Team Members
Ryan Kerbow
Wesley Konderla
Jeremy Nelissen
Evin Schuchardt
Proposal
We are proposing to create a mobile phone app that will allow poets the ability to use TTS to record poem ideas at any time with little effort. The users will then be able to edit there poems, classify them, and save them to their phones for easy retrieval later. This is an implementation of our Project 3.
Posted by Jeremy Nelissen at 2:19 PM
Ryan Kerbow
Wesley Konderla
Jeremy Nelissen
Evin Schuchardt
Proposal
We are proposing to create a mobile phone app that will allow poets the ability to use TTS to record poem ideas at any time with little effort. The users will then be able to edit there poems, classify them, and save them to their phones for easy retrieval later. This is an implementation of our Project 3.
Posted by Jeremy Nelissen at 2:19 PM
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Book Reading #49 - Why We Make Mistakes
Chapter 10: We All Think We’re Above Average
Summary:
People are incredibly over confident. This is displayed in confidence tests, gym memberships, and other tests of one's skill. Information overload helps confidence, but doesn't affect outcomes.
Chapter 11: We’d Rather Wing It
Summary:
We don't read instructions. We'd rather just do it our own way. Experts are classified as such because they spend thousands upon thousands of hours practicing. Cognitive maps are a key way animals solve problems, as we're always looking for the shortest path to "get the cheese."
Discussion:
I like this book. It uses real world examples, and doesn't speak in overly technical terms to try to sound smart. I thought the over confidence struck home, because I want to do some things after college that I'm probably not qualified for right now. I didn't like the second chapter as much. I think it's funny that people will do things without reading the instructions just to do it their own way. Humans are incredibly stubborn. I admit, I tried the cup pouring example without looking at the answers, and I did it the long way the second time too.
Summary:
People are incredibly over confident. This is displayed in confidence tests, gym memberships, and other tests of one's skill. Information overload helps confidence, but doesn't affect outcomes.
Chapter 11: We’d Rather Wing It
Summary:
We don't read instructions. We'd rather just do it our own way. Experts are classified as such because they spend thousands upon thousands of hours practicing. Cognitive maps are a key way animals solve problems, as we're always looking for the shortest path to "get the cheese."
Discussion:
I like this book. It uses real world examples, and doesn't speak in overly technical terms to try to sound smart. I thought the over confidence struck home, because I want to do some things after college that I'm probably not qualified for right now. I didn't like the second chapter as much. I think it's funny that people will do things without reading the instructions just to do it their own way. Humans are incredibly stubborn. I admit, I tried the cup pouring example without looking at the answers, and I did it the long way the second time too.
Book Reading #48 - Media Equation
Part 1: Machines and Mindlessness: Social Responses to Computers
Summary:
This first paper revolved around how humans treat computers. Even though most people claim that computers do not deserve humane treatment, they still show tendencies to treat the computer with compassion. People still treat the computer as a human, even when they shouldn't.
Part 2: Computers are Social Actors
Summary:
This paper continued the theme from the previous paper by focusing on the social interactions between humans and the computer. It explained 5 experiments that determined the differences between "self" and "other" in people's minds, then asked the people about the computers afterward. The computers would praise, criticize, or tutor the user, among other things, and the group studied the results of each action. Part 3: Can Computer Personalities Be Human Personalities?
Summary:
This last paper tried to delve into creating a personality for a computer. They believed personalities could be programmed into the computer, and demonstrated by the speech/communication habits. People preferred computers with traits close to their own. Discussion:
I thought these papers were pretty interesting. From the first two, I thought it was very interesting how people can treat computers with the social norms you'd expect someone to treat another human. When the computer treated the people well, they tried to reciprocate. This is amazing to me considering it's still a computer. Also, the final bit about personalities is pretty cool too. From the first two papers, it doesn't surprise me at all that people would treat a computer better that had a personality similar to their own. I've never really thought about human computer interaction in this space, so I thought it was pretty interesting.
Summary:
This first paper revolved around how humans treat computers. Even though most people claim that computers do not deserve humane treatment, they still show tendencies to treat the computer with compassion. People still treat the computer as a human, even when they shouldn't.
Part 2: Computers are Social Actors
Summary:
This paper continued the theme from the previous paper by focusing on the social interactions between humans and the computer. It explained 5 experiments that determined the differences between "self" and "other" in people's minds, then asked the people about the computers afterward. The computers would praise, criticize, or tutor the user, among other things, and the group studied the results of each action. Part 3: Can Computer Personalities Be Human Personalities?
Summary:
This last paper tried to delve into creating a personality for a computer. They believed personalities could be programmed into the computer, and demonstrated by the speech/communication habits. People preferred computers with traits close to their own. Discussion:
I thought these papers were pretty interesting. From the first two, I thought it was very interesting how people can treat computers with the social norms you'd expect someone to treat another human. When the computer treated the people well, they tried to reciprocate. This is amazing to me considering it's still a computer. Also, the final bit about personalities is pretty cool too. From the first two papers, it doesn't surprise me at all that people would treat a computer better that had a personality similar to their own. I've never really thought about human computer interaction in this space, so I thought it was pretty interesting.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Paper Reading #22
Comments:
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: A POMDP approach to P300-based brain-computer interfaces
Author: Jaeyoung Park, Kee-Eung Kim, Sungho Jo
Venue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
Brain Computer Interfaces (BCI) provide a channel of communication for "conveying messages and commands from the brain to external sources." This is significant because by studying BCIs we can improve communication between the brain and the computer. Perhaps the most popular way of measuring BCIs is by the use of EEGs. EEGs are popular because they are non-invasive, cheap, and easy to use. Also, it has a very reliable signal feature called a P300, which "a positive peak in the signal amplitude at about 300ms after a stimulus is given to the user’s attention." One system that has been proposed using the P300 and EEGs is the P300 speller. The P300 speller has a 6x6 matrix of letters, and the letters randomly and systematically flash, so when the letter that the user is looking at flashes, the P300 is received approximately 300 ms later. This is the BCI system that this group used to test their algorithm.
Most BCI work has been focused on the lower-level of the interface, being feature extraction or classification methods. This paper focuses on a higher level problem: the optimal order or sequence of flashes. To do this, the group used a Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes (POMDP) algorithm. Basically, this algorithm uses several variables (8 total) and combined with the given uncertainty to model sequential decision making. To implement this, raw signals are sent to the preprocessor, which is a collection of bandpass and other filters. Then that is classified to determine if a P300 occurred. Then the system is modeled and sent to the POMDP planner.
The baseline for the experiment was BCI algorithms already in use. The group tested 2x2 and 2x3 matrices. The algorithms the group used to compare to the baseline were POMDP with select actions (PWSA) and without select actions (PWOSA). The PWSA improved the bit rates the most, by 242% to 265%. This was 135% to 151% better than the baseline algorithms already being used.
Discussion:
I found this paper mildly enjoyable. I think this is definitely a usable innovation. I admit I don't know much about BCIs, but the stats presented show that this is an obvious improvement. The thing I didn't like about the algorithm was that it can't be used on any data because it is computationally infeasible. However, this is definitely an improvement and in a useful area. The paper used a TON of mathematical notation and explanation. If you've read my blogs before, you know I don't like that in a paper like this. I think that stuff should be left for a follow up, once you've already captured the audience's attention and have them asking for more. The concept is strong, but the paper loses the reader's attention.
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: A POMDP approach to P300-based brain-computer interfaces
Author: Jaeyoung Park, Kee-Eung Kim, Sungho Jo
Venue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
Brain Computer Interfaces (BCI) provide a channel of communication for "conveying messages and commands from the brain to external sources." This is significant because by studying BCIs we can improve communication between the brain and the computer. Perhaps the most popular way of measuring BCIs is by the use of EEGs. EEGs are popular because they are non-invasive, cheap, and easy to use. Also, it has a very reliable signal feature called a P300, which "a positive peak in the signal amplitude at about 300ms after a stimulus is given to the user’s attention." One system that has been proposed using the P300 and EEGs is the P300 speller. The P300 speller has a 6x6 matrix of letters, and the letters randomly and systematically flash, so when the letter that the user is looking at flashes, the P300 is received approximately 300 ms later. This is the BCI system that this group used to test their algorithm.
Most BCI work has been focused on the lower-level of the interface, being feature extraction or classification methods. This paper focuses on a higher level problem: the optimal order or sequence of flashes. To do this, the group used a Partially Observable Markov Decision Processes (POMDP) algorithm. Basically, this algorithm uses several variables (8 total) and combined with the given uncertainty to model sequential decision making. To implement this, raw signals are sent to the preprocessor, which is a collection of bandpass and other filters. Then that is classified to determine if a P300 occurred. Then the system is modeled and sent to the POMDP planner.
The baseline for the experiment was BCI algorithms already in use. The group tested 2x2 and 2x3 matrices. The algorithms the group used to compare to the baseline were POMDP with select actions (PWSA) and without select actions (PWOSA). The PWSA improved the bit rates the most, by 242% to 265%. This was 135% to 151% better than the baseline algorithms already being used.
Discussion:
I found this paper mildly enjoyable. I think this is definitely a usable innovation. I admit I don't know much about BCIs, but the stats presented show that this is an obvious improvement. The thing I didn't like about the algorithm was that it can't be used on any data because it is computationally infeasible. However, this is definitely an improvement and in a useful area. The paper used a TON of mathematical notation and explanation. If you've read my blogs before, you know I don't like that in a paper like this. I think that stuff should be left for a follow up, once you've already captured the audience's attention and have them asking for more. The concept is strong, but the paper loses the reader's attention.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Paper Reading #20
Comments:
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: UIMarks: Quick Graphical Interaction with Specific Targets
Author: Olivier Chapuis, Nicolas Roussel
Venue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
This paper describes a system designed to allow users to "specify on-screen targets and associated actions by means of a graphical marking language." Essentially, this is a system that allows users to create graphic macros rather than keyboard or typed macros. This allows the user to use recall rather than memorization to specify when to do an action. The types of actions are given by this graphic below:
I thought this was decently interesting. I've read a lot of articles about this type of stuff recently, and throughout the class. I think it's interesting that I read so many articles on this stuff, yet I've never heard of this stuff before this class. I never see it anywhere else or in real world situations. Either that, or I just don't notice them. I wonder who could actually make use of these graphic macros. To me it seems like it would have a small target audience. I thought the paper was well written, not having too much technical information that would bog it down, like other papers do. Overall, I like this system and the paper.
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: UIMarks: Quick Graphical Interaction with Specific Targets
Author: Olivier Chapuis, Nicolas Roussel
Venue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
This paper describes a system designed to allow users to "specify on-screen targets and associated actions by means of a graphical marking language." Essentially, this is a system that allows users to create graphic macros rather than keyboard or typed macros. This allows the user to use recall rather than memorization to specify when to do an action. The types of actions are given by this graphic below:
As demonstrated by the graphic, there are three types of actions: preceding, primary, and following. Only the primary actions are required, while the other actions provide a for richer choices to be made. To implement this system, the group used a slightly adapted version of the bubble cursor. The marks are made in a specific mode, where a semi-transparent overlay allows differentiation between the marks. They implemented this system on Metisse and OS X. Additionally, UIMarks was only intended to supplement other similar systems, rather than replace them or be a stand alone system. The results of the study showed that UIM had 25-60% better results/times than other systems.
Discussion:I thought this was decently interesting. I've read a lot of articles about this type of stuff recently, and throughout the class. I think it's interesting that I read so many articles on this stuff, yet I've never heard of this stuff before this class. I never see it anywhere else or in real world situations. Either that, or I just don't notice them. I wonder who could actually make use of these graphic macros. To me it seems like it would have a small target audience. I thought the paper was well written, not having too much technical information that would bog it down, like other papers do. Overall, I like this system and the paper.
Paper Reading #21
Comments:
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Automatically identifying targets users interact with during real world tasks
Author: Amy Hurst Scott E. Hudson Jennifer Mankoff
Venue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
This system is an improvement on Accessibility APIs. Accessibility APIs provide information about the size and location of targets, which helps analyze the effectiveness and usability of of real world software. However, much of the analysis in these accessibility APIs is done in controlled environments, and as a result many of these APIs do not test many practical real world targets. Some of these missed targets can be used in frequently used software, such as Microsoft Outlook. That is where the technique in this paper steps in.
The solution in this paper can be used across any application "because it leverages visual cues that are ubiquitous across interfaces." This system used a combination of computer vision, machine learning, input event data, and accessibility data. Targets were defined as "interactive elements that the user clicks on." The first level recognizers, used to provide a hypothesized target and location, were a Accessibility API recognizer, Difference Image Recognizer, Color Matching Recognizer, and Template Matching Recognizer. These are described in great detail in the paper.
This technique successfully detected objects from a dataset of 1355 targets with 89% accuracy. Additionally, only 74% of the 1355 targets used could be detected using standard accessibility APIs. The group's hybrid technique was on average 7.2 pixels closer to the actual size of the targets than the Accessibility API alone. That 7.2 pixels represents 19.6% of the average height of the targets used. One limitation of the current implementation is that is can only capture images less than 300x300 pixels. The group believes this to be not a large limitation since larger items are easier to select. Another limitation is that this system is currently only supported on the Windows OS because it uses Microsoft Active Accessibility API. However, the group thinks they could easily extend this to other operating systems. Finally, the group believes by adding more first level recognizers it could further increase the results since this system used many different ones and outperformed all of them on a one-on-one basis.
Discussion:
I found this paper to be pretty interesting. I think it is good to upgrade an area that has so many practical applications and uses. Also, I like how this can be used for more "targets" and a wider spectrum of applications than the current Accessibility APIs. There were a few sentences that did not make sense and had obvious grammatical errors, but were not corrected. I'm a stickler for those types of things, so I think those things should be corrected on a paper like this. However, the fact remains that this is very good technology that has high practical uses.
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Automatically identifying targets users interact with during real world tasks
Author: Amy Hurst Scott E. Hudson Jennifer Mankoff
Venue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
This system is an improvement on Accessibility APIs. Accessibility APIs provide information about the size and location of targets, which helps analyze the effectiveness and usability of of real world software. However, much of the analysis in these accessibility APIs is done in controlled environments, and as a result many of these APIs do not test many practical real world targets. Some of these missed targets can be used in frequently used software, such as Microsoft Outlook. That is where the technique in this paper steps in.
The solution in this paper can be used across any application "because it leverages visual cues that are ubiquitous across interfaces." This system used a combination of computer vision, machine learning, input event data, and accessibility data. Targets were defined as "interactive elements that the user clicks on." The first level recognizers, used to provide a hypothesized target and location, were a Accessibility API recognizer, Difference Image Recognizer, Color Matching Recognizer, and Template Matching Recognizer. These are described in great detail in the paper.
This technique successfully detected objects from a dataset of 1355 targets with 89% accuracy. Additionally, only 74% of the 1355 targets used could be detected using standard accessibility APIs. The group's hybrid technique was on average 7.2 pixels closer to the actual size of the targets than the Accessibility API alone. That 7.2 pixels represents 19.6% of the average height of the targets used. One limitation of the current implementation is that is can only capture images less than 300x300 pixels. The group believes this to be not a large limitation since larger items are easier to select. Another limitation is that this system is currently only supported on the Windows OS because it uses Microsoft Active Accessibility API. However, the group thinks they could easily extend this to other operating systems. Finally, the group believes by adding more first level recognizers it could further increase the results since this system used many different ones and outperformed all of them on a one-on-one basis.
Discussion:
I found this paper to be pretty interesting. I think it is good to upgrade an area that has so many practical applications and uses. Also, I like how this can be used for more "targets" and a wider spectrum of applications than the current Accessibility APIs. There were a few sentences that did not make sense and had obvious grammatical errors, but were not corrected. I'm a stickler for those types of things, so I think those things should be corrected on a paper like this. However, the fact remains that this is very good technology that has high practical uses.
Book Reading #47 - Why We Make Mistakes
Chapter 8: We Like Things Tidy
Summary:
People remember things as much "cleaner" than they were in reality. For example, people remember rivers, states, streets, etc as much straighter than they really are. Also, humans will alter stories so they make sense in their mind, even to great lengths. Finally, how much we remember is greatly limited, and we also will believe our own outright fibs if it fits the impression in our own mind.
Chapter 9: Men Shoot First
Summary:
The main difference between men and women is the level of confidence. Men are more confident in themselves, which leads to better navigation, debugging, and social skills. Men will over estimate how well they did, why women will under estimate their performance. The role of tinkering and exploring as children can lead to these results.
Discussion:
I thought the bit about how we remember things being straighter was really neat. People generally like things organized, in some form or another, and I thought it was cool we even do this to our own mind. I didn't think anything else particularly stuck out in the rest of the chapter, except how we will change a story so it will make sense in our own mind. I loved the second chapter. I immediately texted my fiancee to tell her that the book said men are better navigators. I also loved the part about directions, but strongly disagree that using landmarks is more concrete. What happens if there is more than one church, as in the example in the book? I know I'm biased, but I also know that cardinal directions don't change, nor do mileages. The best solution is probably something in the middle.
Summary:
People remember things as much "cleaner" than they were in reality. For example, people remember rivers, states, streets, etc as much straighter than they really are. Also, humans will alter stories so they make sense in their mind, even to great lengths. Finally, how much we remember is greatly limited, and we also will believe our own outright fibs if it fits the impression in our own mind.
Chapter 9: Men Shoot First
Summary:
The main difference between men and women is the level of confidence. Men are more confident in themselves, which leads to better navigation, debugging, and social skills. Men will over estimate how well they did, why women will under estimate their performance. The role of tinkering and exploring as children can lead to these results.
Discussion:
I thought the bit about how we remember things being straighter was really neat. People generally like things organized, in some form or another, and I thought it was cool we even do this to our own mind. I didn't think anything else particularly stuck out in the rest of the chapter, except how we will change a story so it will make sense in our own mind. I loved the second chapter. I immediately texted my fiancee to tell her that the book said men are better navigators. I also loved the part about directions, but strongly disagree that using landmarks is more concrete. What happens if there is more than one church, as in the example in the book? I know I'm biased, but I also know that cardinal directions don't change, nor do mileages. The best solution is probably something in the middle.
Monday, April 11, 2011
Emotional Design
Summary:
Visceral, behavioral, and reflective are three levels of processing. A design also needs to balance creativity and focus; when focus is low, creativity can be higher, but when a task requires high levels of focus, creativity should be low.
Visceral design is tied to attractiveness, behavioral design is related to efficiency and pleasure of use, and reflective design is personal satisfaction, memories, and self-image. No matter what, no single design will satisfy all users, thus market segmentation becomes very important. Lastly, designs must balance what people "need" and what people "want," and this is not an easy task.
Visceral design is the built-in attractiveness, in which physical features dominate. Performance and use dominate in behavioral design, while attractiveness and rationale do not factor. Finally, reflective design is all about the meaning of the product, and how it connects with the user.
Discussion:
I didn't realize that the schedule was serious that we were supposed to write a full blog on this. I've forgotten a lot about this book, but I never really enjoyed it. I've stated this before, but I really don't enjoy Norman's books. This book did make me think about Apple products. People love them, but yet they don't really have a powerful design or product. People will overlook all the problems with Apple products just because it says "Apple." Apple got the visceral design perfect for the masses, and the behavioral aspect is pretty good for the first time users. Apple products (especially the laptops) generally don't annoy people or crash, so people will overlook the lack of power and still come away behaviorally satisfied. And since Apple succeeds in the two lower level aspects, in general the reflective aspect of their design succeeds. I think this is less true with their mobile devices, however, as I want to destroy my iPhone. Apple products made me realize just how true all the stuff Norman was claiming really is. That being said, I didn't even remotely consider finishing that book. Way too boring and repetitive.
Visceral, behavioral, and reflective are three levels of processing. A design also needs to balance creativity and focus; when focus is low, creativity can be higher, but when a task requires high levels of focus, creativity should be low.
Visceral design is tied to attractiveness, behavioral design is related to efficiency and pleasure of use, and reflective design is personal satisfaction, memories, and self-image. No matter what, no single design will satisfy all users, thus market segmentation becomes very important. Lastly, designs must balance what people "need" and what people "want," and this is not an easy task.
Visceral design is the built-in attractiveness, in which physical features dominate. Performance and use dominate in behavioral design, while attractiveness and rationale do not factor. Finally, reflective design is all about the meaning of the product, and how it connects with the user.
Discussion:
I didn't realize that the schedule was serious that we were supposed to write a full blog on this. I've forgotten a lot about this book, but I never really enjoyed it. I've stated this before, but I really don't enjoy Norman's books. This book did make me think about Apple products. People love them, but yet they don't really have a powerful design or product. People will overlook all the problems with Apple products just because it says "Apple." Apple got the visceral design perfect for the masses, and the behavioral aspect is pretty good for the first time users. Apple products (especially the laptops) generally don't annoy people or crash, so people will overlook the lack of power and still come away behaviorally satisfied. And since Apple succeeds in the two lower level aspects, in general the reflective aspect of their design succeeds. I think this is less true with their mobile devices, however, as I want to destroy my iPhone. Apple products made me realize just how true all the stuff Norman was claiming really is. That being said, I didn't even remotely consider finishing that book. Way too boring and repetitive.
Things That Make Us Smart
Summary:
Technology has not aided our ability to learn, but rather has been an obstacle to learning. Norman obviously does not like technology that hampers our ability to learn. He mentions all the good inventions of our time, such as writing, reading, and art, but doesn't praise engineering.
Norman states that there are two kinds of cognition, and three kinds of learning. The two types of cognition are experiential and reflective. Experiential is when one is so adept at a task, that it is done instantaneously, while reflective is one must contemplate before making an action. The three types of learning are accretion (accumulation of facts), tuning (from practicing/repetition), and restructuring (developing new conceptual models).
There are two types of "worlds:" the represented world- that which is being represented (aka the real world), and the representing world- symbols or models to represent the real, represented world. "It is things that make us smart," as Norman says, because writing and reading and "cognitive artifacts" are what make us smart. Socrates was against using books because he thought it would eliminate reflective thought, but this did not turn out to be the case until recently. Objects must be represented in appropriate ways. An example is how prescriptions for drugs are very difficult to read because they're not written in a matrix form. Another example Norman used was an addition game compared to tic tac toe. Even though they are essentially the same game, without proper representation, the addition game is difficult to comprehend.
How we fit or represent an artifact is a key point as well. Digital and analog interfaces each have their own pros and cons, and neither is altogether better. The design of things also needs to lend itself to the use of artifacts. Norman uses three different versions of the "Tower of Hanoi" problem to show that the design can lend itself to make the problem easier: each version required a different number of rules. Graphs are also another source of misleading of information, or altogether incorrect, if the wrong type of graphs and/or labels are used. The two types of representation are surface and internal representation, and surface representation is the one that is concerning to the public because that is where they see the cognitive artifacts.
Discussion:
I don't really enjoy reading Norman's books. He is incredibly long winded and repeats himself a lot. I find it hard to continue following along when he uses a couple of pages to describe something altogether simple or unimportant to the chapter/book as a whole. Also, his stance for writing this book is questionable in my opinion. In the book, especially the first chapter, he makes it sound as though all items should be informative to the user, and people should learn from every task they do. I strongly disagree with this viewpoint. Leisure, pleasure, and relaxation are also key to a human's life, in my opinion. I think making our lives more comfortable is the best part of technology. I don't think all technology should exist to make us smarter, and I don't think we should do every task just to further educate ourselves. Also, this book seems to be only a slight variation of the other works he has produced. Although this one does emphasize the cognitive realm more than the physical design, I find it very similar to the previous books because he actually talks about a lot of the same things. I like that he uses examples, but I don't like the examples he uses. In "Why We Make Mistakes," the author uses tons of real life examples of things that actually happened and it captures the readers. Norman uses a bunch of hypothetical or broad examples, rather than key historical events with people, such as saying "people struggle reading prescriptions" rather than describing a significant situation in which that happened. Overall, while I think Norman is very intelligent and proposes good points, I wouldn't read this again and won't be finishing the book.
Technology has not aided our ability to learn, but rather has been an obstacle to learning. Norman obviously does not like technology that hampers our ability to learn. He mentions all the good inventions of our time, such as writing, reading, and art, but doesn't praise engineering.
Norman states that there are two kinds of cognition, and three kinds of learning. The two types of cognition are experiential and reflective. Experiential is when one is so adept at a task, that it is done instantaneously, while reflective is one must contemplate before making an action. The three types of learning are accretion (accumulation of facts), tuning (from practicing/repetition), and restructuring (developing new conceptual models).
There are two types of "worlds:" the represented world- that which is being represented (aka the real world), and the representing world- symbols or models to represent the real, represented world. "It is things that make us smart," as Norman says, because writing and reading and "cognitive artifacts" are what make us smart. Socrates was against using books because he thought it would eliminate reflective thought, but this did not turn out to be the case until recently. Objects must be represented in appropriate ways. An example is how prescriptions for drugs are very difficult to read because they're not written in a matrix form. Another example Norman used was an addition game compared to tic tac toe. Even though they are essentially the same game, without proper representation, the addition game is difficult to comprehend.
How we fit or represent an artifact is a key point as well. Digital and analog interfaces each have their own pros and cons, and neither is altogether better. The design of things also needs to lend itself to the use of artifacts. Norman uses three different versions of the "Tower of Hanoi" problem to show that the design can lend itself to make the problem easier: each version required a different number of rules. Graphs are also another source of misleading of information, or altogether incorrect, if the wrong type of graphs and/or labels are used. The two types of representation are surface and internal representation, and surface representation is the one that is concerning to the public because that is where they see the cognitive artifacts.
Discussion:
I don't really enjoy reading Norman's books. He is incredibly long winded and repeats himself a lot. I find it hard to continue following along when he uses a couple of pages to describe something altogether simple or unimportant to the chapter/book as a whole. Also, his stance for writing this book is questionable in my opinion. In the book, especially the first chapter, he makes it sound as though all items should be informative to the user, and people should learn from every task they do. I strongly disagree with this viewpoint. Leisure, pleasure, and relaxation are also key to a human's life, in my opinion. I think making our lives more comfortable is the best part of technology. I don't think all technology should exist to make us smarter, and I don't think we should do every task just to further educate ourselves. Also, this book seems to be only a slight variation of the other works he has produced. Although this one does emphasize the cognitive realm more than the physical design, I find it very similar to the previous books because he actually talks about a lot of the same things. I like that he uses examples, but I don't like the examples he uses. In "Why We Make Mistakes," the author uses tons of real life examples of things that actually happened and it captures the readers. Norman uses a bunch of hypothetical or broad examples, rather than key historical events with people, such as saying "people struggle reading prescriptions" rather than describing a significant situation in which that happened. Overall, while I think Norman is very intelligent and proposes good points, I wouldn't read this again and won't be finishing the book.
Book Reading #45 - Things That Make Us Smart
Chapter 3: The Power of Representation
Summary:
There are two types of "worlds:" the represented world- that which is being represented (aka the real world), and the representing world- symbols or models to represent the real, represented world. "It is things that make us smart," as Norman says, because writing and reading and "cognitive artifacts" are what make us smart. Socrates was against using books because he thought it would eliminate reflective thought, but this did not turn out to be the case until recently. Objects must be represented in appropriate ways. An example is how prescriptions for drugs are very difficult to read because they're not written in a matrix form. Another example Norman used was an addition game compared to tic tac toe. Even though they are essentially the same game, without proper representation, the addition game is difficult to comprehend.
Chapter 4: Fitting the Artifact to the Person
Summary:
How we fit or represent an artifact is a key point as well. Digital and analog interfaces each have their own pros and cons, and neither is altogether better. The design of things also needs to lend itself to the use of artifacts. Norman uses three different versions of the "Tower of Hanoi" problem to show that the design can lend itself to make the problem easier: each version required a different number of rules. Graphs are also another source of misleading of information, or altogether incorrect, if the wrong type of graphs and/or labels are used. The two types of representation are surface and internal representation, and surface representation is the one that is concerning to the public because that is where they see the cognitive artifacts.
Discussion:
I somewhat enjoyed the third chapter. I think he brings up very good points, such as the numerical system comparisons. However, I was always taught that order does matter for Roman numbers, like IV is 4, not 6. I didn't like how Norman said we are not really learning or knowing information if we are reading it. I disagree because that would ignore the function of cuing: we could see a simple phrase that would aid our recollection of a larger bit of information. I thought the fourth chapter was altogether pretty boring, as I found myself struggling to follow along with his explanations. He is very long winded, and I'm not sure there is a good enough connection between the title of the chapter and the topics he discusses.
Summary:
There are two types of "worlds:" the represented world- that which is being represented (aka the real world), and the representing world- symbols or models to represent the real, represented world. "It is things that make us smart," as Norman says, because writing and reading and "cognitive artifacts" are what make us smart. Socrates was against using books because he thought it would eliminate reflective thought, but this did not turn out to be the case until recently. Objects must be represented in appropriate ways. An example is how prescriptions for drugs are very difficult to read because they're not written in a matrix form. Another example Norman used was an addition game compared to tic tac toe. Even though they are essentially the same game, without proper representation, the addition game is difficult to comprehend.
Chapter 4: Fitting the Artifact to the Person
Summary:
How we fit or represent an artifact is a key point as well. Digital and analog interfaces each have their own pros and cons, and neither is altogether better. The design of things also needs to lend itself to the use of artifacts. Norman uses three different versions of the "Tower of Hanoi" problem to show that the design can lend itself to make the problem easier: each version required a different number of rules. Graphs are also another source of misleading of information, or altogether incorrect, if the wrong type of graphs and/or labels are used. The two types of representation are surface and internal representation, and surface representation is the one that is concerning to the public because that is where they see the cognitive artifacts.
Discussion:
I somewhat enjoyed the third chapter. I think he brings up very good points, such as the numerical system comparisons. However, I was always taught that order does matter for Roman numbers, like IV is 4, not 6. I didn't like how Norman said we are not really learning or knowing information if we are reading it. I disagree because that would ignore the function of cuing: we could see a simple phrase that would aid our recollection of a larger bit of information. I thought the fourth chapter was altogether pretty boring, as I found myself struggling to follow along with his explanations. He is very long winded, and I'm not sure there is a good enough connection between the title of the chapter and the topics he discusses.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
Book Reading #46 - Why We Make Mistakes
Chapter 6: We’re in the Wrong Frame of Mind
Summary:
Our frame of mind, or frame of reference, is a key part in our interactions. For example, the first offer in negotiations, such as the listing price of a house, becomes the anchor, or frame of reference, for all future offers. Also, we don't notice when grocery stores charge more for non-sale items after advertising a sale.
Chapter 7: We Skim
Summary:
Humans tend to not notice the finer details when doing something that is routine to them or that they've done many times before. As a result, newspapers are constantly printing mistakes, and music sight readers will miss errors in the notes. Also, the book provides an example of a woman hanging herself in her tree on Halloween, and people not noticing because they thought it was a decoration.
Discussion:
I thought the bit about the grocery stores was really interesting. I'm not sure this chapter (6) is properly titled though. I don't see how the frame of mind really comes into play, but rather just the point of reference or context. Context is also really important in some of the next chapter, such as when he's describing where people learn things. I thought the part about the woman hanging herself was very telling and interesting. However, I am worried this book is going to get repetitive.
Summary:
Our frame of mind, or frame of reference, is a key part in our interactions. For example, the first offer in negotiations, such as the listing price of a house, becomes the anchor, or frame of reference, for all future offers. Also, we don't notice when grocery stores charge more for non-sale items after advertising a sale.
Chapter 7: We Skim
Summary:
Humans tend to not notice the finer details when doing something that is routine to them or that they've done many times before. As a result, newspapers are constantly printing mistakes, and music sight readers will miss errors in the notes. Also, the book provides an example of a woman hanging herself in her tree on Halloween, and people not noticing because they thought it was a decoration.
Discussion:
I thought the bit about the grocery stores was really interesting. I'm not sure this chapter (6) is properly titled though. I don't see how the frame of mind really comes into play, but rather just the point of reference or context. Context is also really important in some of the next chapter, such as when he's describing where people learn things. I thought the part about the woman hanging herself was very telling and interesting. However, I am worried this book is going to get repetitive.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Ethnography Results, Week 8
Wesley and I will go tomorrow night (Wednesday) as we normally do.
Update:
Wesley and I went to Revs Wednesday night as planned. I must say, it was a pretty awful night to go. There wasn't much of a crowd, and the wind made it cold. On top of that, the performers for the Open Mic Night were absolutely horrible. They couldn't sing, tune an instrument, or set the appropriate volumes for Mic and instruments. We couldn't hear them over their instruments. Wesley and I each had one beer. Only one of the people there was someone we recognized from previous trips, and he was also one of the performers. There were 10-15 people there total, and this was even after arriving at 1015. The music did not start until 1020 or so, even though it usually starts at 10. I attribute the late start and the lack of crowd due to that the performers who had followers were not there. Revs didn't have any "star power," so to speak, meaning they didn't have the people who had generated followings performing. Perhaps those popular performers were even performing somewhere else, and took their groupies with them. I was really disappointed that this was how we were going to end our study of Revs. I enjoyed the previous 2 or 3 trips, but this one was just awful.
Update:
Wesley and I went to Revs Wednesday night as planned. I must say, it was a pretty awful night to go. There wasn't much of a crowd, and the wind made it cold. On top of that, the performers for the Open Mic Night were absolutely horrible. They couldn't sing, tune an instrument, or set the appropriate volumes for Mic and instruments. We couldn't hear them over their instruments. Wesley and I each had one beer. Only one of the people there was someone we recognized from previous trips, and he was also one of the performers. There were 10-15 people there total, and this was even after arriving at 1015. The music did not start until 1020 or so, even though it usually starts at 10. I attribute the late start and the lack of crowd due to that the performers who had followers were not there. Revs didn't have any "star power," so to speak, meaning they didn't have the people who had generated followings performing. Perhaps those popular performers were even performing somewhere else, and took their groupies with them. I was really disappointed that this was how we were going to end our study of Revs. I enjoyed the previous 2 or 3 trips, but this one was just awful.
Book Reading #43 - Things That Make Us Smart
Chapter 1: A Human-Centered Technology
Summary:
Technology has not aided our ability to learn, but rather has been an obstacle to learning. Norman obviously does not like technology that hampers our ability to learn. He mentions all the good inventions of our time, such as writing, reading, and art, but doesn't praise engineering.
Chapter 2: Experiencing the World
Summary:
Norman states that there are two kinds of cognition, and three kinds of learning. The two types of cognition are experiential and reflective. Experiential is when one is so adept at a task, that it is done instantaneously, while reflective is one must contemplate before making an action. The three types of learning are accretion (accumulation of facts), tuning (from practicing/repetition), and restructuring (developing new conceptual models).
Discussion:
I really don't understand Norman. How can technology be a bad thing? Why should everything teach, rather than entertain? I thought the second chapter was much better, and that it was a good description of learning and cognition. There was so much information that it was hard to not write a very long blog entry. I think I still missed several key points, but didn't want to write a novel. I still don't really agree with Norman's point of view, however.
Summary:
Technology has not aided our ability to learn, but rather has been an obstacle to learning. Norman obviously does not like technology that hampers our ability to learn. He mentions all the good inventions of our time, such as writing, reading, and art, but doesn't praise engineering.
Chapter 2: Experiencing the World
Summary:
Norman states that there are two kinds of cognition, and three kinds of learning. The two types of cognition are experiential and reflective. Experiential is when one is so adept at a task, that it is done instantaneously, while reflective is one must contemplate before making an action. The three types of learning are accretion (accumulation of facts), tuning (from practicing/repetition), and restructuring (developing new conceptual models).
Discussion:
I really don't understand Norman. How can technology be a bad thing? Why should everything teach, rather than entertain? I thought the second chapter was much better, and that it was a good description of learning and cognition. There was so much information that it was hard to not write a very long blog entry. I think I still missed several key points, but didn't want to write a novel. I still don't really agree with Norman's point of view, however.
Paper Reading #19
Comments:
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Addressing the Problems of Data-Centric Physiology-Affect Relations Modeling
Author: Roberto Legaspi, Ken-ichi Fukui, Koichi Moriyama, Satoshi Kurihara, Masayuki Numao, Merlin SuarezVenue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
"Data-centric affect modeling can render itself restrictive in practical applications for three reasons, namely, it falls short to investigate feature optimality, focuses on inferring discrete, rather than continuous, affect classes and deals with small to average sized datasets." Reporting people's emotions is an incredibly complex problem. People can categorize their emotions into discrete categories, but this does not truly explain what happens neurologically and physiologically. Furthermore, theorists who classify emotion have long been divided on whether to classify emotions as categorical or dimensional. Thus the issues in this paper are not easily explained.
The machine learning described in this paper uses continuous values to describe affective states. This proposes a problem because it leads to regression analysis. Most of the new, state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms have either a O(n^2) or O(n^3) complexity. Thus, large amount of data required for this issue can slow down a system by a huge amount. Music was used for emotion induction, manipulation, and regulation. From the readings collected, feature vectors with 49 attribute values were constructed. An EEG was used to label feature vectors with affect values. The EEG used "emotion spectrum analysis to induce from brainwave signals the user affective states." Essentially, both the affective states and the physiology of the state were recorded at the same time to truly understand each aspect. There were 4 affect types, and thus 4 datasets constructed. These datasets had different continuous affect labels but the same physiological attribute values. Also, a base case, or period of rest, was used at the start of each experiment and in between each sound.
The results of this system were exceptional, but difficult to interpret in the format provides. Even when the number of features were reduced, the results remained very efficient.
Discussion:
I think this was the most difficult paper to read yet. I still have not truly figured out what this paper is about, or more specifically what this system is targeted at ultimately accomplishing. As a result, I have a hard time really saying whether or not I like the article. I don't know what an affect type is, or how it's useful, and don't think the article adequately explained the issue. I even read this article twice. My assumptions are that this is used for some psychological purpose, but that's merely a guess. I really wish there were more of these articles which were easier to read and better explained. I wish I could provide more personal analysis, but I really can't because I simply can not understand the purpose of this paper, or many of the technical details involved.
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Addressing the Problems of Data-Centric Physiology-Affect Relations Modeling
Author: Roberto Legaspi, Ken-ichi Fukui, Koichi Moriyama, Satoshi Kurihara, Masayuki Numao, Merlin SuarezVenue: IUI 2009/2010
Summary:
"Data-centric affect modeling can render itself restrictive in practical applications for three reasons, namely, it falls short to investigate feature optimality, focuses on inferring discrete, rather than continuous, affect classes and deals with small to average sized datasets." Reporting people's emotions is an incredibly complex problem. People can categorize their emotions into discrete categories, but this does not truly explain what happens neurologically and physiologically. Furthermore, theorists who classify emotion have long been divided on whether to classify emotions as categorical or dimensional. Thus the issues in this paper are not easily explained.
The machine learning described in this paper uses continuous values to describe affective states. This proposes a problem because it leads to regression analysis. Most of the new, state-of-the-art machine learning algorithms have either a O(n^2) or O(n^3) complexity. Thus, large amount of data required for this issue can slow down a system by a huge amount. Music was used for emotion induction, manipulation, and regulation. From the readings collected, feature vectors with 49 attribute values were constructed. An EEG was used to label feature vectors with affect values. The EEG used "emotion spectrum analysis to induce from brainwave signals the user affective states." Essentially, both the affective states and the physiology of the state were recorded at the same time to truly understand each aspect. There were 4 affect types, and thus 4 datasets constructed. These datasets had different continuous affect labels but the same physiological attribute values. Also, a base case, or period of rest, was used at the start of each experiment and in between each sound.
The results of this system were exceptional, but difficult to interpret in the format provides. Even when the number of features were reduced, the results remained very efficient.
Discussion:
I think this was the most difficult paper to read yet. I still have not truly figured out what this paper is about, or more specifically what this system is targeted at ultimately accomplishing. As a result, I have a hard time really saying whether or not I like the article. I don't know what an affect type is, or how it's useful, and don't think the article adequately explained the issue. I even read this article twice. My assumptions are that this is used for some psychological purpose, but that's merely a guess. I really wish there were more of these articles which were easier to read and better explained. I wish I could provide more personal analysis, but I really can't because I simply can not understand the purpose of this paper, or many of the technical details involved.
Monday, April 4, 2011
Coming of Age in Samoa
Summary:
The introduction discusses the differences in typical scientific experiments and the studies of an anthropologist. Through this, the author states that anthropological study is the correct way to analyze why adolescents seem to have so much strife. Finally she explains that she studied a group of about 50 girls in Samoa to determine if they struggled through the same things as American youths or if adolescent struggles are culturally dependent.
In this chapter, the author discusses what a typical day in Samoa may look like. She uses lots of imagery about what each group of people are doing.
This section described the methodology used. The author describes the qualitative and quantitative advantages/drawbacks and how they apply to this study.
This section described the ages and capabilities of the girls studied. Since the birth certificates were generally not kept, only the approximate ages were obtainable. There are 68 girls from the approximate ages of 8-20.
Girls' primary tasks in house is weaving. Men try to become matais, but not too soon because it is demanding to always act in that manner. Girls tend the young ones until they're old enough to carry loads, so girls try not to get married too soon so they can have a break
Family title and lineage is very important to the Samoan culture. The author describes an example where one girl was given the taupa title over another in the same household even though the one not chosen was more aptly suited. Households ties are loose and are presided over by a matai. Relation is very strict, especially between sexes of similar ages.
Children in Samoa primarily interact in age and relation groups. When they reach puberty, they are given more tasks and can interact less. Males interact in some casual homosexual relations. Children under the age of 15 or 16 are not recognized in the community. Women are not seen as taboo as in other Polynesian cultures, as evidenced by the lack of ignoring women when they're menstruating. Women do not suffer the same penal code as men.
The relations between males and females is emotionally charged from adolescence until they're old. Between unmarried, the three types of relations are the "clandestine encounter," public elopement, and ceremonious courtship, but "surreptitious rape" also exists for those cannot gain a mate. Celibacy is meaningless to the Samoans. Dancing is the only activity that both sexes of all ages participate in. The strict subordination of the children isn't present here, and it reduces the shyness in some of the children. Even the defects are included in the dancing with openness. The word musu expresses "unwillingness and intractability," and can be applied to a mistress, chief or baby. It is treated with superstitious respect. For the most part, villagers know everything that happens with other villagers. There is very little privacy in the Samoan culture. Children see death, sex, and birth. Homosexual relations are usually casual and substitute for heterosexual ones, except in the case of Sasi, who made lots of advancements on boys. Jealousy and conflict are not as prevalent in Samoan culture as our own, largely due to the independence and the opportunity to experiment freely. Rash delinquency was uncommon, and only demonstrated in two girls in the author's nine months there.
In the sexual relation alone are a married couple treated as one. Pregnant women are treated with special taboo, and are not allowed to do almost any activity alone because only "only things which are wrong are done in solitude and any wrong deed committed by the expectant mother will injure the child." A widowed matai must cast aside his title and pretend to be a youth if he wishes to remarry.
When comparing the upbringing of American and Samoan children, Samoans simply have less choices or thus potential for conflict, whether it relate to religion or the diversity of her family or the family influences on life choices. The treatment of sex is the largest rift between the two cultures, and the author talks at great lengths about the issue. Finally the author at the end compares the (formal) educational differences, and how American children have much different views of work, school, and play.
The author clearly believes that our children should be allowed to choose what they believe or how they live, rather than the parents trying to impose their own standards on their children. She states that the multitude of choices present to our children makes it more imperative that children be taught how to think, not what to think, as this will reduce the strain on the adolescents. Thus she believes the strain on adolescents is caused from the parents trying to control their children's beliefs rather than the nature of being an adolescent.
Many subtle Western tools and ideals have been acculturated into the Samoan lifestyle. Knifes, tobacco, and mosquito nets are now used, while large canoes have been replaced by smaller ones. The government does not interfere with their lifestyle. Punishment has changed a lot, and the emphasis on puberty has wained.
Discussion:
I can't say that I enjoyed this book. The subject matter is just not appealing to me. Also, while ethnographies have obvious importance to computer science, I don't see how this one was the best one for us to read. I get that it was the original ethnography or whatever, but I still think we could have read something more recent that would give better tips on performing ethnographies in a computer setting. As it stands, I found the deemphasis on privacy and sex to be the most interesting part of the book, probably for obvious reasons. With the nature of their culture, they cannot have much privacy. Also, I thought the ways their culture adapted recently, like adding mosquito nets, were really neat. No one has really interfered with their culture, and they just keep on living how they want to. I don't think their education system is superior at all. I strongly disagree with the views of the author about education. It's part of a parent's job to instill a sense of right/wrong.
Book Reading #44 - Why We Make Mistakes
Chapter 4: We Wear Rose Colored Glasses
Summary:
Humans recall experiences of their actions more favorably than what actually happens. Disclosing bias does not do anything to eliminate the effects of that bias, and sometimes even makes the result worse. Several examples of how people do not remember their role in events are examined, most notably test scores and John Dean's role in Watergate.
Chapter 5: We Can Walk and Chew Gum - but Not Much Else
Summary:
People are terrible at "multi-tasking," which is a myth anyways. In spite of this fact, cars are becoming increasingly distracting. Distraction caused 78% of all car accidents with a camera in the car, and 65% of all near accidents.
Discussion (both):
I really enjoyed these chapters as well. I like how many examples he uses. I found the part about the Nixon-Watergate to be the most interesting part about the first chapter, and the facts about car accidents to be most interesting about the second chapter. I think Chapter 4 just shows how little you should believe from your friends, or "take it with a grain of salt." Chapter 5 makes me want to never buy a new car.
Summary:
Humans recall experiences of their actions more favorably than what actually happens. Disclosing bias does not do anything to eliminate the effects of that bias, and sometimes even makes the result worse. Several examples of how people do not remember their role in events are examined, most notably test scores and John Dean's role in Watergate.
Chapter 5: We Can Walk and Chew Gum - but Not Much Else
Summary:
People are terrible at "multi-tasking," which is a myth anyways. In spite of this fact, cars are becoming increasingly distracting. Distraction caused 78% of all car accidents with a camera in the car, and 65% of all near accidents.
Discussion (both):
I really enjoyed these chapters as well. I like how many examples he uses. I found the part about the Nixon-Watergate to be the most interesting part about the first chapter, and the facts about car accidents to be most interesting about the second chapter. I think Chapter 4 just shows how little you should believe from your friends, or "take it with a grain of salt." Chapter 5 makes me want to never buy a new car.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Book Reading #42 - Coming of Age in Samoa
Appendix III: Samoan Civilization as It Is Today
Summary:
Many subtle Western tools and ideals have been acculturated into the Samoan lifestyle. Knifes, tobacco, and mosquito nets are now used, while large canoes have been replaced by smaller ones. The government does not interfere with their lifestyle. Punishment has changed a lot, and the emphasis on puberty has wained.
Discussion:
I thought it was interesting that some of the same ideals are still present. For example, they still do not use furniture and must not address another while standing. However, the do use mosquito nets and other items, even if they prefer the older ways in some cases. I think it's a good thing that people have not tried to change their lifestyle too much, and rather have let them choose how they want to live.
Summary:
Many subtle Western tools and ideals have been acculturated into the Samoan lifestyle. Knifes, tobacco, and mosquito nets are now used, while large canoes have been replaced by smaller ones. The government does not interfere with their lifestyle. Punishment has changed a lot, and the emphasis on puberty has wained.
Discussion:
I thought it was interesting that some of the same ideals are still present. For example, they still do not use furniture and must not address another while standing. However, the do use mosquito nets and other items, even if they prefer the older ways in some cases. I think it's a good thing that people have not tried to change their lifestyle too much, and rather have let them choose how they want to live.
Paper Reading #18
Comments:
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Personalized News Recommendation Based on Click Behavior
Author: Jiahui Liu, Peter Dolan, Elin Rønby Pedersen
Venue: IUI 2010, Google Inc.
Summary:
This paper discusses new ways people who read their news online could get that news. Large numbers of people use things like Google News and Yahoo! to get their news. However, the previous algorithm Google News used was comparing against people who had read similar articles. This poses a problem because recently released articles that haven't been read yet may be skipped over. This system is designed to fix that problem.
Google News, as well as many other sites, use text-based classifications to sort articles into categories. This system would do the same as well, but instead of comparing what articles the user read to what others have also read, it will compare to all articles, with an emphasis on the recent. To conduct this analysis, the group used Google News users, and kept everything anonymous per the Google policies. The first thing this system does is compares what categories the user typically clicks on. This provides a "click distribution." Next it compares the click history with previous months to see if there is a change in the user's interests based on their clicks. Then the click distributions of all users on particular news items is compared to analyze the potential impacts on local, national, and global news. Using this data, a Bayesian framework is constructed to predict the user's interests. Also, the group kept a "recommended reading" section, which did not contain personalized articles, but articles that were popular or significant elsewhere. The results of their test showed that frequency of visits from the test group was 14.1% higher, with a 99% confidence interval. This is a significant improvement.
Discussion:
I thought this article was pretty entertaining. I can see lots of people using it, and only makes Google even more superior. There was lots of technical details and formulas that I didn't feel were necessary. I think a good article shouldn't contain many of those. Those should be saved for a sales pitch or something like that. It's a good way to get people coming back for more, in my opinion. I haven't ever used Google News, but I think I may try it for my news information. They proved that this method works, so it is unlikely that this would fail when taken out of testing. My one complaint is that it takes a click as a positive vote. What happens if you don't like what you clicked on after reading it?
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Personalized News Recommendation Based on Click Behavior
Author: Jiahui Liu, Peter Dolan, Elin Rønby Pedersen
Venue: IUI 2010, Google Inc.
Summary:
This paper discusses new ways people who read their news online could get that news. Large numbers of people use things like Google News and Yahoo! to get their news. However, the previous algorithm Google News used was comparing against people who had read similar articles. This poses a problem because recently released articles that haven't been read yet may be skipped over. This system is designed to fix that problem.
Google News, as well as many other sites, use text-based classifications to sort articles into categories. This system would do the same as well, but instead of comparing what articles the user read to what others have also read, it will compare to all articles, with an emphasis on the recent. To conduct this analysis, the group used Google News users, and kept everything anonymous per the Google policies. The first thing this system does is compares what categories the user typically clicks on. This provides a "click distribution." Next it compares the click history with previous months to see if there is a change in the user's interests based on their clicks. Then the click distributions of all users on particular news items is compared to analyze the potential impacts on local, national, and global news. Using this data, a Bayesian framework is constructed to predict the user's interests. Also, the group kept a "recommended reading" section, which did not contain personalized articles, but articles that were popular or significant elsewhere. The results of their test showed that frequency of visits from the test group was 14.1% higher, with a 99% confidence interval. This is a significant improvement.
Discussion:
I thought this article was pretty entertaining. I can see lots of people using it, and only makes Google even more superior. There was lots of technical details and formulas that I didn't feel were necessary. I think a good article shouldn't contain many of those. Those should be saved for a sales pitch or something like that. It's a good way to get people coming back for more, in my opinion. I haven't ever used Google News, but I think I may try it for my news information. They proved that this method works, so it is unlikely that this would fail when taken out of testing. My one complaint is that it takes a click as a positive vote. What happens if you don't like what you clicked on after reading it?
Ethnography Results, Week 7
Wesley and I could not go last night (Wednesday), which is our usual night to go, because of scheduling conflicts. As a result, we're going Sunday and then again next Wednesday.
Update:
Wesley and I went to poetry slam night last night (Sunday). It was a similar atmosphere as the previous Wednesday, but there were even more people there this time. Obviously poetry slam is incredibly popular. I must admit, I thought this was much more fun. The types of people were about the same as Open Mic night. There were a few people from Austin as well, and they fit right in, just to give an idea of the types of people there. Also, one of the performers was a guy I grew up with since I was little. It was funny seeing him perform. He was a guy who, quite simply, was an "easy target" because he didn't know how to stand up for himself. He got "messed with" his whole life, but nothing serious like fights or anything like that. Just simple teasing or pranks. Most, if not all, of the poetry was religiously or parentally charged. People complained or discussed issues with a rough childhood or controversial religious issues. The one exception was a woman who talked about the conflicts of being a stripper and being used sexually. These things, combined with my previous knowledge of my poet friend, causes me to believe that the crowd that attends these things fall into these categories. I understand how having a hard childhood could cause internal conflict that people need to release or express in some way. It seems to me that these people all have some tragedy or strife that causes them to turn to poetry. Overall, I had a good time. It's much more fun when there are more people there.
Update:
Wesley and I went to poetry slam night last night (Sunday). It was a similar atmosphere as the previous Wednesday, but there were even more people there this time. Obviously poetry slam is incredibly popular. I must admit, I thought this was much more fun. The types of people were about the same as Open Mic night. There were a few people from Austin as well, and they fit right in, just to give an idea of the types of people there. Also, one of the performers was a guy I grew up with since I was little. It was funny seeing him perform. He was a guy who, quite simply, was an "easy target" because he didn't know how to stand up for himself. He got "messed with" his whole life, but nothing serious like fights or anything like that. Just simple teasing or pranks. Most, if not all, of the poetry was religiously or parentally charged. People complained or discussed issues with a rough childhood or controversial religious issues. The one exception was a woman who talked about the conflicts of being a stripper and being used sexually. These things, combined with my previous knowledge of my poet friend, causes me to believe that the crowd that attends these things fall into these categories. I understand how having a hard childhood could cause internal conflict that people need to release or express in some way. It seems to me that these people all have some tragedy or strife that causes them to turn to poetry. Overall, I had a good time. It's much more fun when there are more people there.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Book Reading #41 - Why We Make Mistakes
Chapter 2: We All Search for Meaning
Summary:
People generally don't remember names because of the lack of meaning. However, people do remember faces. There have been over 200 convicted criminals released because they were found innocent by DNA evidence, and 77% of them were identified by the eyewitnesses.
Discussion:
I liked this chapter again. I like that the author does not speak in technical terms, but also uses a lot of statistics. I found that a lot of the stats he used in this chapter have applied to me in the past. I thought it was just something that applied to me, but apparently is very common.
Chapter 3: We Connect the Dots
Summary:
Humans can make decisions based on things we do not notice or see. For example, strippers earn more according to where they are in their fertility cycle. Also colors, such as black, have an impact on how we make a decision. Finally people generally believe that one should not change answers on a test from the first answer, even though this is proven to be incorrect, and additionally people regret changing these answers more so than not changing them.
Discussion:
Again I found this chapter to hit home, so to speak. I always regret changing an answer more so than not changing an answer. I found the part about the strippers to be very astonishing because I would think that would be the last thing to affect their pay.
Summary:
People generally don't remember names because of the lack of meaning. However, people do remember faces. There have been over 200 convicted criminals released because they were found innocent by DNA evidence, and 77% of them were identified by the eyewitnesses.
Discussion:
I liked this chapter again. I like that the author does not speak in technical terms, but also uses a lot of statistics. I found that a lot of the stats he used in this chapter have applied to me in the past. I thought it was just something that applied to me, but apparently is very common.
Chapter 3: We Connect the Dots
Summary:
Humans can make decisions based on things we do not notice or see. For example, strippers earn more according to where they are in their fertility cycle. Also colors, such as black, have an impact on how we make a decision. Finally people generally believe that one should not change answers on a test from the first answer, even though this is proven to be incorrect, and additionally people regret changing these answers more so than not changing them.
Discussion:
Again I found this chapter to hit home, so to speak. I always regret changing an answer more so than not changing an answer. I found the part about the strippers to be very astonishing because I would think that would be the last thing to affect their pay.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Paper Reading #17
Comments:
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Aspect-level news browsing: understanding news events from multiple viewpoints
Author: Souneil Park, SangJeong Lee, Junehwa SongVenue: IUI 2010
Summary:
A large issue with news reporting is the bias of the author or the news station they work for. A result of this is that the general public does not get an accurate representation of an issue because most readers do not thoroughly search a subject. Instead readers go to one or maybe two providers and get an article that emphasizes certain aspects rather than the issue as a whole. If readers went to all sources and compared the results, they would get a much more accurate view of the issue at hand.
The purpose of this paper is to provide a solution to this problem. Google News, and other things similar to it, only provide event level browsing. This system would organize events based on the aspect that paper emphasizes. For example, each different aspect of the event and how it was covered would be represented in a different corner. Bias in reporters can be seen by the different topics or aspects that they choose to emphasize, as already said, so organizing items in this fashion is not unfeasible. Aspect-level classification is achieved in two steps: aspect extraction and article classification. Keywords play a prominent role in each of these things, but things such as meta-data also are important. The group had high success with their aspect classification system.
Discussion:
I think this is another good idea for news browsing. This one builds off the previous article on the list of readings, which I was actually assigned to read after this one. Reading the other one first made this article much easier to understand. Similar to the other article, this article had a lot of formulas and technical talk despite the somewhat easy concept. As a result I thought it was harder to read than it could (or should) have been. I believe that people, for the most part, are not interested in the technical "how" these things are made, but rather what it does and if it works. I think this system will work given the data that they collected and will be yet another improvement to Google's empire. I'm not sure if their idea of spacing, placing things in the corners, is going to work. People like to look in one area for all their information. Placing things all across the screen is not good management of the screen space, in my opinion. However, I do think that ultimately this will work, especially since it has Google backing. Rule of thumb for me: Never under estimate Google.3
Comment #1
Comment #2
Reference:
Title: Aspect-level news browsing: understanding news events from multiple viewpoints
Author: Souneil Park, SangJeong Lee, Junehwa SongVenue: IUI 2010
Summary:
A large issue with news reporting is the bias of the author or the news station they work for. A result of this is that the general public does not get an accurate representation of an issue because most readers do not thoroughly search a subject. Instead readers go to one or maybe two providers and get an article that emphasizes certain aspects rather than the issue as a whole. If readers went to all sources and compared the results, they would get a much more accurate view of the issue at hand.
The purpose of this paper is to provide a solution to this problem. Google News, and other things similar to it, only provide event level browsing. This system would organize events based on the aspect that paper emphasizes. For example, each different aspect of the event and how it was covered would be represented in a different corner. Bias in reporters can be seen by the different topics or aspects that they choose to emphasize, as already said, so organizing items in this fashion is not unfeasible. Aspect-level classification is achieved in two steps: aspect extraction and article classification. Keywords play a prominent role in each of these things, but things such as meta-data also are important. The group had high success with their aspect classification system.
Discussion:
I think this is another good idea for news browsing. This one builds off the previous article on the list of readings, which I was actually assigned to read after this one. Reading the other one first made this article much easier to understand. Similar to the other article, this article had a lot of formulas and technical talk despite the somewhat easy concept. As a result I thought it was harder to read than it could (or should) have been. I believe that people, for the most part, are not interested in the technical "how" these things are made, but rather what it does and if it works. I think this system will work given the data that they collected and will be yet another improvement to Google's empire. I'm not sure if their idea of spacing, placing things in the corners, is going to work. People like to look in one area for all their information. Placing things all across the screen is not good management of the screen space, in my opinion. However, I do think that ultimately this will work, especially since it has Google backing. Rule of thumb for me: Never under estimate Google.3
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)