Search Results for "multimodal interaction"

The multimodal interaction can be very useful in the modern conditions, especially while in traffic. It can help pedestrians, as well as drivers to be focused on the traffic, while doing in the same time usual things like checking the e-mail. By combining traditional mouse/keyboard input with non-traditional user input modes, such as pen, speech and gestures one can achieve visible improvements in device interactivity, for example by saying a word, instead of typing it. In such a way, while on the road you don’t have to be focused on

Multimodal interaction systems combine visual information (involving images, text, sketches and so on) with voice, gestures and other modalities to provide flexible and powerful dialogue approaches, enabling users to choose one or more of the multiple interaction modalities. They break down the barriers in adopting mobile devices for value-added services and the use of integrated multiple input modes enables users to benefit from the natural approach used in human communication. This paper deals with the main features of multimodal interaction and

What are the most suitable interaction paradigms for navigational and informative tasks for pedestrians? Is there an influence of social and situational context on multimodal interaction? A new study takes a closer look at a multimodal system on a handheld device that was recently developed as a prototype for mobile navigation assistance. The system allows visitors of a city to navigate, to get information on sights, and to use and manipulate map information. In an outdoor evaluation, we studied the usability of such a system on site. The study

This project focuses on exploring multimodal interaction in immersive environments, particularly on the problem of target disambiguation while selecting an object in 3D. We have created an interactive 3D environment as our test bed and have used it in a variety of augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) scenarios.Often in 3D immersive environments the user is faced with many selection problems, such as imprecise pointing at a distance, selection of occluded/hidden objects, and recognition errors (e.g., speech recognition errors). Our goal is to

Human interactions are multimodal in nature. From simple to complex forms of transferal of information, human beings draw on a multiplicity of communicative modes, such as intonation and gaze, to make sense of everyday experiences. Likewise, the learning process, either within traditional classrooms or Virtual Learning Environments, is shaped by learners' perceptions of what is being communicated multimodally to them intentionally or not, and by the perceptible pedagogical affordances of the environment. This paper examines the specific place of

Multimodal interaction provides the user with multiple modes of interfacing with a system beyond the traditional keyboard and mouse input/output. The most common such interface combines a visual modality (e.g. a display, keyboard, and mouse) with a voice modality (speech recognition for input, speech synthesis and recorded audio for output). However other modalities, such as pen-based input or haptic input/output, may be used. Multimodal user interfaces are a research area in human-computer interaction. The advantage of multiple modalities is

The W3C Multimodal Interaction Activity is developing specifications as a basis for a new breed of Web application with multiple modes of interaction. Consider applications which use speech, hand writing, and key presses for input, and spoken prompts, audio and visual displays for output. It is implemented by several drafts, which we will briefly review in this article. These include InkML, a language that serves as the data exchange format for representing ink entered with an electronic pen or stylus; and EMMA, a data exchange format for representing

The W3C Multimodal Interaction Activity group is developing specifications for a new breed of Web application that allows multiple modes of interaction—for instance, speech, handwriting, and keypresses for input, and spoken prompts, audio, and visual displays for output. Specification drafts include: * Ink Markup Language (InkML), which serves as the data exchange format for representing ink entered with an electronic pen or stylus. * Extensible MultiModal Annotation (EMMA), a data exchange format for representing application-specific

Here's a summary of the most recent face to face meeting of the W3C Multimodal Interaction Working Group. Summary of the W3C Multimodal Interaction Working Group and Ink Subgroup Face to Face meetings December 9-11 (main meeting) 12-13 (ink subgroup meeting) Washington DC, USA hosted by Cisco This was the fourth face to face meeting of the Multimodal Interaction Working Group. There were 33 attendees from 23 organizations. This meeting also included a smaller follow-on meeting of the subgroup of the MMI group which is working on an ink

The W3C Multimodal Interaction (MMI) Working Group [1] held a face to face meeting in Hawthorne, New York, September 22-24, 2004, hosted by IBM. There were 33 attendees from 23 organizations. This note summarizes the results of the meeting. The MMI meeting was colocated with a meeting of the Voice Browser Working Group [2]. We took advantage of this to hold a joint meeting with the Voice Browser group about the evolving Voice Browser V3 architecture and its relationship to multimodal architectures. The MMI meeting focused on MMI

Multimodal Interaction Should Degrade Gracefully Human interaction degrades gracefully; for example, a face-to-face conversation degrades gracefully in that it still remains effective when one of the participants in the conversation is functionally blind, e.g., when talking over a telephone. This form of graceful degradation is due to the high level of redundancy in human communication. As man-machine interfaces come to include multimodal interaction, we need to ensure that these interfaces degrade gracefully in a manner akin to human conversation.