skip to main content
10.1145/3025453.3025530acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Seeing, Sensing and Recognizing Laban Movement Qualities

Published:02 May 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

Human movement has historically been approached as a functional component of interaction within human computer interaction. Yet movement is not only functional, it is also highly expressive. In our research, we explore how movement expertise as articulated in Laban Movement Analysis (LMA) can contribute to the design of computational models of movement's expressive qualities as defined in the framework of Laban Efforts. We include experts in LMA in our design process, in order to select a set of suitable multimodal sensors as well as to compute features that closely correlate to the definitions of Efforts in LMA. Evaluation of our model shows that multimodal data combining positional, dynamic and physiological information allows for a better characterization of Laban Efforts. We conclude with implications for design that illustrate how our methodology and our approach to multimodal capture and recognition of Effort qualities can be integrated to design interactive applications.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

pn1407.mp4

mp4

57.1 MB

pn1407p.mp4

mp4

1.8 MB

p4009-fdili-alaoui.mp4

mp4

237.3 MB

References

  1. Irmgard Bartenieff. 1970. Four Adaptations of Effort Theory in Research and Teaching. Gordon and Breach Science, NY, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Frédéric Bevilacqua, Bruno Zamborlin, Antony Sypniewski, Norbert Schnell, Fabrice Guédy, and Nicolas Rasamimanana. 2010. Continuous realtime gesture following and recognition. In Embodied Communication and Human-Computer Interaction, volume 5934 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, 73--84. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. andreas Scharader Borge Kordts, Bashar Altakrouri. 2015. Capturing and Analysing Movement Using Depth Sensors and Labanotation. In ACM SIGGRAPH Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Durell Bouchard and Norman Badler. 2007. Semantic segmentation of motion capture using laban movement analysis. In Intelligent Virtual Agents. Springer, 37--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Mary C. Broughton and Catherine J. Stevens. 2012. Analyzing Expressive Qualities in Movement and Stillness: Effort-Shape Analyses of Solo Marimbists' Bodily Expression. (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Antonnio Camurri, Barbara Mazzarino, Matteo Ricchetti, Renee Timmers, and Gualtierro Volpe. 2004. Multimodal analysis of expressive gesture in music and dance performances. In Gesture-based communication in human-computer interaction volume 2915 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, 357--358. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Diane Chi, Monica Costa, Liwei Zhao, and Norman Badler. 2000. The EMOTE model for effort and shape. In In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH. ACM, 173--182. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Martha Davis. 1987. Steps to achieving observer agreement: the LIMS reliability project. Movement Studies (NY: Laban / Bartenieff Institute) 2 (1987), 7--19.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Paul Dourish. 2004. Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction. The MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Daniel Fallman. 2011. The new good: exploring the potential of philosophy of technology to contribute to human-computer interaction. In Proceedings of the 2011 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'11). ACM, 1051--1060. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Sarah Fdili Alaoui, Frederic Bevilacqua, Bertha Bermudez, and Christian Jacquemin. 2013. Dance Interaction with physical model visualization based on movement qualities. International Journal of Arts and Technology, IJART (2013), 0--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Sarah Fdili Alaoui, Baptiste Caramiaux, Marcos Serrano, and Frédéric Bevilacqua. 2012. Movement qualities as interaction modality. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS'12). ACM Press, Newcastle, UK, 761--769. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Sarah Fdili Alaoui, Kristin Carlson, Shannon Cuykendall, , Karen Studd, Karen Bradley, and Thecla Schiphorst. 2015a. How Do Experts Observe Movement. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Movement and Computing. Vancouver, BC, Canada. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Sarah Fdili Alaoui, Thecla Schiphorst, Shannon Cuykendall, Kristin Carlson, Karen Studd, and Karen Bradley. 2015b. Strategies for Embodied Design: The Value and Challenges of Observing Movement. In Proceedings of ACM Creativity and Cognition (CC '15). ACM, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, 121--130.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Jules Françoise, Baptiste Caramiaux, and Frédéric Bevilacqua. 2012. A Hierarchical Approach for the Design of Gesture-to-Sound Mappings. In Proceedings of SMC conference. 233--240.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Jules Françoise, Sarah Fdili Alaoui, Thecla Schiphorst, and Frédéric Bevilacqua. 2014. Vocalizing Dance Movement for Interactive Sonification of Laban Effort Factors. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '14). ACM, Vancouver, Canada, 1079--1082. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Marco Gillies, Rebecca Fiebrink, Atau Tanaka, Jérémie Garcia, Frederic Bevilacqua, Alexis Heloir, Fabrizio Nunnari, Wendy Mackay, Saleema Amershi, Bongshin Lee, Nicolas d'Alessandro, Joëlle Tilmanne, Todd Kulesza, and Baptiste Caramiaux. 2016. Human-Centred Machine Learning. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'16). ACM, 3558--3565. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Kristina Höök, Martin P Jonsson, Anna Ståhl, and Johanna Mercurio. 2016. Somaesthetic Appreciation Design. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16). ACM, San Jose, CA, USA, 3131--3142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Caroline Hummels, Kees C. J. Overbeeke, and Sietske Klooster. 2007. Move to get moved: a search for methods, tools and knowledge to design for expressive and rich movement-based interaction. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 11, 8 (oct 2007), 677--690. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. David Kirsh. 2013. Embodied cognition and the magical future of interaction design. ACM Transaction on Computer Human Interaction 20, 1 (2013), 1--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Rudolf Laban and F. C Lawrence. 1974. Effort Economy of Human Movement. Princeton Book.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Rudolf Laban and Lisa Ullmann. 1963. Modern educational dance. MacDonald and Evans.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Amy LaViers and Magnus Egerstedt. 2012. Style based robotic motion. American Control Conference (ACC) (2012).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Wonjun Lee and Richard Shusterman. 2014. Practicing Somaesthetics : Exploring Its Impact on Interactive Product Design Ideation. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '14). ACM, Vancouver, Canada, 1055--1064. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. JA Levy and MP Duke. 2003. Laban Movement Analysis in the study of personality, emotional state and movement style: An exploratory investigation of the veridicality of body language. Individual Differences Research 1, 1 (2003), 39.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Lian Loke and George Poonkhin Khut. 2011. Surging Verticality : An Experience of Balance. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI'11). ACM, 237--240.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Lian Loke and Toni Robertson. 2013. Moving and making strange: An embodied approach to movement-based interaction design. Transaction on Computer Human Interaction 20, 1 (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Tino Lourens, Roos van Berkel, and Emilia Barakova. 2010. Communicating emotions and mental states to robots in a real time parallel framework using Laban movement analysis. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 58, 12 (2010), 1256--1265. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Diego Silang Maranan, Sarah Fdili Alaoui, Thecla Schiphorst, Philippe Pasquier, and Lyn Bartram. 2014. Designing For Movement : Evaluating Computational Models using LMA Effort Qualities. In Proceedings of the 2014 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'14). ACM, Toronto, Canada.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Elena Márquez Segura, Laia Turmo Vidal, Asreen Rostami, and Annika Waern. 2016. Embodied Sketching. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16). ACM, San Jose, CA, USA, 6014--6027. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. M. Masuda, S. Kato, and H. Itoh. 2009. Emotion detection from body motion of human form robot based on laban movement analysis. Springer. 322--334 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Helena Mentis and Carolina Johansson. 2013. Seeing Movement Qualities. In Proceedings of the 2013 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI'13). ACM, Paris, France, 3375--3384. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. M Merleau-Ponty. 1945. Phenomenology of Perception. Editions Gallimard.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Jin Moen. 2007. From hand-held to body-worn: embodied experiences of the design and use of a wearable movement-based interaction concept. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI'07). ACM, 251--258.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Marianne Graves Petersen, Ole Sejer Iversen, Peter Gall Krogh, and Martin Ludvigsen. 2004. Aesthetic Interaction: A Pragmatist's Aesthetics of Interactive Systems. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '04). ACM, Cambridge, MA, USA, 269--276. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Mary Pietrowicz, Guy Garnett, Robert McGrath, and John Toenjes. 2010. Multimodal Gestural Interaction in Performance. In Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '10). ACM, 1--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Nicolas Rasamimanana, Frédéric Bevilacqua, Norbert Schnell, Emmanuel Fléty, and Bruno Zamborlin. 2011. Modular Musical Objects Towards Embodied Control Of Digital Music Real Time Musical Interactions. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI '11). ACM, 9--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. TD Sanger. 2007. Bayesian filtering of myoelectric signals. Journal of neurophysiology (2007), 1839--1845.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Thecla Schiphorst. 2011. Self-evidence: Applying Somatic Connoisseurship to Experience Design. In CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '11). ACM, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 145--160. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Norbert Schnell, Axel Röbel, Diemo Schwarz, Geoffroy Peeters, and Riccardo Borghesi. 2009. Mubu & friends assembling tools for content based real-time interactive audio processing in max/msp. In Proceedings of International Computer Music Conference. Montreal.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Richard Shusterman. 2012. Thinking through the body: Essays in somaesthetics. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Karen A Studd and Laura L Cox. 2013. Everybody is a body. Dog Ear Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Gualtierro Volpe. 2003. Computational models of expressive gesture in Computational models of expressive gesture in multimedia systems. Ph.D. Dissertation. InfoMus Lab, Genova.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Danielle Wilde, Thecla Schiphorst, and Sietske Klooster. 2011. Move to Design/Design to Move: A Conversation About Designing for the Body. interactions 18, 4 (jul 2011), 22--27.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Margaret Wilson. 2009. Dance pedagogy case studies: A grounded theory approach to analyzing qualitative data. Research in Dance Education 10, 1 (2009), 3--16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Liwei Zhao and Norman Badler. 2005. Acquiring and validating motion qualities from live limb gestures. Graphical Models journal 67, 1 (2005), 1--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Seeing, Sensing and Recognizing Laban Movement Qualities

    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
      CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2017
      7138 pages
      ISBN:9781450346559
      DOI:10.1145/3025453

      Copyright © 2017 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: 2 May 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '17 Paper Acceptance Rate600of2,400submissions,25%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader