skip to main content
10.1145/2677199.2680605acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesteiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Eugenie: Multi-Touch and Tangible Interaction for Bio-Design

Published:15 January 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

We present a case study of applying TEI research to a data-intense scientific workflow that requires the exploration of large datasets through the construction of complex queries. We describe our two-year-long effort and design iterations of Eugenie, an interface for helping synthetic biologists through the collaborative and intricate process of bio-design. We introduce new interaction techniques for browsing large data sets and for constructing complex queries with active tangible tokens and an interactive tabletop. We also discuss challenges and opportunities for applying TEI to support data-driven inquiry.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

tei0338.m4v

m4v

18.3 MB

p217.mp4

mp4

185.9 MB

References

  1. (n.d.). Retrieved from Sifteo: https://www.sifteo.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Antle, A. N., & Wise, A. F. (2013). Getting down to details: Using theories of cognition and learning to inform tangible user interface design. Interacting with Computers, 25(1).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Bilitchenko L, Liu A, Cheung S, Weeding E, Xia B, Leguia M, Densmore D (2011). Eugene-a domain specific language for specifying and constraining synthetic biological parts, devices, and systems. PLoS One 6(4).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Block, F., Horn, M. S., Phillips, B. C., et. al. (2012). The DeepTree Exhibit: Visualizing the tree of life to facilitate informal learning.Visualization and Computer Graphics, IEEE, 18(12). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Camarata, K., Do, E. Y. L., Johnson, B. R., & Gross, M. D. (2002). Navigational blocks: navigating information space with tangible media. In Proc. of IUI, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Drucker, S., Fisher, D., Sadana, R., Herron, J., & Schraefel, M. C. (2013). TouchVix: A Case Study Comparing Two Interfaces for Data Analytics on Tablets. In Proc. of CHI, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Glenberg AM (2008) Embodiment for education. In: Calvo P, Gomila T (ed) Handbook of cognitive science: an embodied approach, pp 355--372Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Hornecker, E., Marshall, P., Dalton, N. S., & Rogers, Y. (2008). Collaboration and interference: awareness with mice or touch input. In Proc. of CSCW, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Isenberg, P., Isenberg, T., Hesselmann, T., Lee, B., Von Zadow, U., & Tang, A. (2013). Data visualization on interactive surfaces: A research agenda. Computer Graphics and Applications, IEEE, 33(2), 16--24. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Jetter, H. C., Gerken, J., Zöllner, M., Reiterer, H., & MilicFrayling, N. (2011). Materializing the query with facetstreams: a hybrid surface for collaborative search on tabletops. In Proc. Of CHI, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Klum, S., Isenberg, P., Langner, R., Fekete, J. D., & Dachselt, R. (2012). Stackables: combining tangibles for faceted browsing. In Proc. of AVI. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Morris, M. R., Brush, A. B., & Meyers, B. R. (2007). Reading revisited: Evaluating the usability of digital display surfaces for active reading tasks. In Proc. of ITS, IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Morris, M. R., Fisher, D., & Wigdor, D. (2010). Search on surfaces: Exploring the potential of interactive tabletops for collaborative search tasks. Information processing & management, 46(6), 703--717. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Patten, J., & Ishii, H. (2000). A comparison of spatial organization strategies in graphical and tangible user interfaces. In Proc. of DARE, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Rekimoto, J., Ullmer, B., & Oba, H. (2001). DataTiles: a modular platform for mixed physical and graphical interactions. In Proc. of CHI, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Shaer, O., & Hornecker, E. (2010). Tangible user interfaces: past, present, and future directions. Foundations and Trends in HCI, 3(1--2). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Shaer, O., Mazalek, A., Ullmer, B., & Konkel, M. (2013). From Big Data to Insights: Opportunities and Challenges for TEI in Genomics. In Proc. of TEI. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Shaer, O., Strait, M., Valdes, C., Wang, H., Feng, T., Lintz, M., ... & Liu, S. (2012). The design, development, and deployment of a tabletop interface for collaborative exploration of genomic data. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 70(10), 746--764. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Synthetic Biology Open Language (2011) Retrieved from http:// www.sbolstandard.org/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Thudt, A., Hinrichs, U., & Carpendale, S. (2012). The bohemian bookshelf: supporting serendipitous book discoveries through information visualization. In Proc. of CHI, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Ullmer, B., Ishii, H., & Jacob, R. J. (2003). Tangible query interfaces: Physically constrained tokens for manipulating database queries. In Proc. of Interact.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Valdes, C., Ferreirae, M. & Shaer, O. (2012). A Collaborative Environment for Engaging Novices in Scientific Inquiry , In Proc. ITS 2012, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Valdes, C., Eastman, D., Grote, & Konkel. M. (2014). Exploring the Design Space of Gestural Interaction with Active Tokens through User-Defined Gestures. In Proc. of CHI 2014, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Voida, S., Tobiasz, M., Stromer, J., Isenberg, P., & Carpendale, S. (2009). Getting practical with interactive tabletop displays: designing for dense data, fat fingers, diverse interactions, and face-to-face collaboration. In Proc. of the ITS, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Xu, W., Chang, K., Francisco, N., Valdes, C., Kincaid, R., & Shaer, O. (2013). From wet lab bench to tangible virtual experiment: SynFlo. In Proc. of TEI. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Zigelbaum, J., Horn, M. S., Shaer, O., & Jacob, R. J. (2007). The tangible video editor: collaborative video editing with active tokens. In Proc. of TEI, ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Eugenie: Multi-Touch and Tangible Interaction for Bio-Design

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        TEI '15: Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction
        January 2015
        766 pages
        ISBN:9781450333054
        DOI:10.1145/2677199

        Copyright © 2015 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 15 January 2015

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        TEI '15 Paper Acceptance Rate63of222submissions,28%Overall Acceptance Rate393of1,367submissions,29%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader