Supporting Collaborative Awareness in Tele-immersion

1. SupportingCollaborative Awarenessin Tele-immersion

2. Kevin M. Curry kcurry@csgrad.cs.vt.edu Dept. of Computer Science, Virginia Tech VT-CAVE, University Visualization & Animation Group 2000 Kraft Drive, Suite 2400, Blacksburg, VA, USA 24061 phone: 1 + (540) 231-2066

3. Abstract • Motivated to address fundamental human • factors issues surrounding collaborative • interaction in Tele-immersion • Impact of system performance on • usability taken care of • traditional HCI and CSCW issues not • covered as thoroughly A major component of collaborative interaction is AWARENESS • An interpretation of awareness is presented • The CAVE Collaborative Console is introduced

4. Introduction Awareness is crucial to computer-mediated collaboration (CMC). It is the basis for recognizing the potential for interaction. • The idea of collaborative awareness has been around • for some time in CSCW [Ellis, et. al., ‘91]. • Benford and Bowers looked at it in the context of • collaborative virtual environments (CVEs) [‘94, ‘96]. • This is where we start when designing for • collaborative interaction in Tele-immersion...

5. Interpreting Awareness Awareness can be achieved by numerous means and through various media, each of which may have individual or combined, isolated or global implications. (This seems especially true in Tele-immersion, which seeks to provide more “natural” forms of awareness.) • A participant’s desire to be noticed can be • enhanced or restricted, thus increasing or • decreasing the likelihood that other’s will be • aware of that participant • Awareness can be either mutual or one-way. • It can have a wide or narrow scope of • interest and extended or limited range.

6. Spatial Model of Interaction • Benford, et. al., 1994 Medium the mode of communication; text, audio, video, etc. Aura the portion of space for which interaction is enabled and allowed Focus a representation of the “observing object’s interest in a particular medium”; what the observer is trying to perceive Nimbus representation of the observed object’s desire to be perceived [in a particular medium] Adapters objects which can modify aura, focus, and nimbus in order to customize interaction between participants

7. Extending the Spatial Model • In some sense, all objects in a VE can have their own aura, focus, and nimbus • “Interaction” is any type of connection or communication between objects • Collision of auras creates the potential for awareness - level of focus and nimbus determine it (privacy vs. enhanced awareness) • Media behave as they would in actual space (e.g. light and sound attenuate) - unless we desire otherwise (shared views, cameras) cont’d...

8. Extending the Spatial Model … cont’d Gradient Awareness Awareness is treated as a scaleable concept comprised of multiple components in multiple media. Totally Aware - All Cues + All Media Sources Totally Unaware - No Cues from Any Media Trying to emphasize the fact that each medium may have multiple parameters(e.g., mono vs. stereo)... Partially Aware - Mix of Some Cues/All Media and All Cues/Some Media Global & Encapsulated Awareness - Scope of Knowledge about the Environment

9. Presence Presence is the sense of “being there”. • In one sense, it’s the degree to which you feel a part of • the environment - that space exists and you are in it. • In another sense, it’s the degree to which you perceive • others sharing your environment - embodiment, • peripheral cues. Basic forms are cheap and easy: participant list, text description of world w/ a picture. But Tele-immersion goes WAY beyond that Immersion in 3D, Avatars, Sound

10. Action Awareness Knowing what other collaborators are doing... • Physical Gestures play a big role here. • Also, altering the appearance of an avatar to convey • activity (e.g., Leigh, et. al., “mortal” and “deity”). • Finally, shared views,cameras,andtethering… • … but we’ll come back to those later.

11. Attention Awareness Knowing another person’s focus and range of perception... • This a big one in all of CSCW! - consider chat, where • you have almost no way to verify that the other person • is paying attention. • Bowers, et. al., describe issues they encountered: • “corpsing it”, real-world distractions. • Avatars come into play again here. • Again, shared views,cameras,andtethering

12. Location Awareness Knowing where other collaborators are in the world... • This a big one in Tele-immersion! - • SC ‘98 experience with LIMBO • many large rooms with occlusions (walls) and • know way to locate anyone not currently in your • line of sight. • Peripheral devices and utilities: radar, participant list, • directional finders, views, tethers...

13. Views A person’s literal point of view is the subject of much discussion in CSCW, especially in Tele-immersion • Subjective Views vs. Shared Views • By default, we should all see with our own eyes • But we might also want some variation of WISIWYS or WYSIWIS • Cameras and Camera Positions • Common is graphics apps for viewing multiple perspectives quickly • Like have a surveillance system in a building

14. Configuration of the Collaborative Session in Tele-immersion • CAVEs, Idesks, Simulators • CAVERNsoft and LIMBO • Hybrid networking and database management • Generic avatar and empty world into which shared objects can be loaded • The CAVE Collaborative Console...

15. Keyboard Input Device Voice Input Translation Protocol Perl & C progs. Wand LIMBO CAVE Collaborative Console Console Item ... Radar Participant List -------- -------- -------- Status Panel --- -------- -- ------- --- --- - MyView Radar MapView Radar WorldView Radar

16. Console Objects - Performer-based (C/C++) • Radar - ThreeSpaceRadar, FloorPlanRadar • Lists - ParticipantList, ObjectList Console Utilities • teleport - to location, to person, to object • tether/detach - to person, to moving object • view - anything from a specified camera_position • (FRONT | BACK | LEFT | RIGHT | TOP | BOTTOM) • Http://bleen.sv.vt.edu/~kcurry/ccc.html