CS295J/Proposal reviews from class 8: Difference between revisions
New page: == Name == === Intellectual merit === (your paragraph here) === Gaps === * Your * Bullet * List * Here |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
(your paragraph here) | (your paragraph here) | ||
=== Gaps === | |||
* Your | |||
* Bullet | |||
* List | |||
* Here | |||
== Gideon == | |||
=== Intellectual merit === | |||
A meta-analysis of a subset of the cognitive psychology and human-computer interaction literature presents evidence that interactions between humans and computers can be improved by taking into account the cognitive resources required for different types of tasks. It is well known that humans and computers excel at different types of tasks, but the field has not made an explicit effort to standardize a set of guidelines that interface designers may use when developing computer systems. For people and computers to function in an optimized, complementary fashion, we still need a systematic way of distributing tasks amongst them. | |||
It is often the case that what computers excel at, humans have difficulty with (e.g., arithmetic). While, the opposite is also true (e.g., pattern-recognition). After a preliminary search of the literature, we've explored common tasks in software today that have neglected consideration of this performance dichotomy. Designers have not been appropriately addressed these gaps in the computer industry due to a lack of multidisciplinary research. Our meta-analysis presents data that supports our view on two different tasks: 3D shape-rotation and face recognition. | |||
We have demonstrated in just a 30-hour study that computer assisted 3D Shape Rotation is consistently preferred over human-only mental rotation. Complementarily, humans consistently outperform modern computer systems in face recognition. Sometimes these performance gaps are obvious due to a lack of technology or common-sense. However, that is not only the case. Our preliminary study clearly demonstrates that systems benefit from consistent and rule-based task distribution guidelines. Furthermore, the literature is rich with other types of tasks which await our systematic exploitation. Upon further study, the community will benefit from a tested and systematic approach for designing improved human-computer interfaces. | |||
=== Gaps === | === Gaps === | ||
Revision as of 01:46, 9 March 2009
Name
Intellectual merit
(your paragraph here)
Gaps
- Your
- Bullet
- List
- Here
Gideon
Intellectual merit
A meta-analysis of a subset of the cognitive psychology and human-computer interaction literature presents evidence that interactions between humans and computers can be improved by taking into account the cognitive resources required for different types of tasks. It is well known that humans and computers excel at different types of tasks, but the field has not made an explicit effort to standardize a set of guidelines that interface designers may use when developing computer systems. For people and computers to function in an optimized, complementary fashion, we still need a systematic way of distributing tasks amongst them.
It is often the case that what computers excel at, humans have difficulty with (e.g., arithmetic). While, the opposite is also true (e.g., pattern-recognition). After a preliminary search of the literature, we've explored common tasks in software today that have neglected consideration of this performance dichotomy. Designers have not been appropriately addressed these gaps in the computer industry due to a lack of multidisciplinary research. Our meta-analysis presents data that supports our view on two different tasks: 3D shape-rotation and face recognition.
We have demonstrated in just a 30-hour study that computer assisted 3D Shape Rotation is consistently preferred over human-only mental rotation. Complementarily, humans consistently outperform modern computer systems in face recognition. Sometimes these performance gaps are obvious due to a lack of technology or common-sense. However, that is not only the case. Our preliminary study clearly demonstrates that systems benefit from consistent and rule-based task distribution guidelines. Furthermore, the literature is rich with other types of tasks which await our systematic exploitation. Upon further study, the community will benefit from a tested and systematic approach for designing improved human-computer interfaces.
Gaps
- Your
- Bullet
- List
- Here