Category Archives: Input Devices

Paper: Wearables as Context for Guiard-abiding Bimanual Touch

This particular paper has a rather academic-sounding title, but at its heart it makes a very simple and interesting observation regarding touch that any user of touch-screen technology can perhaps appreciate.

The irony is this: when interaction designers talk about “natural” interaction, they often have touch input in mind. And so people tend to take that for granted. What could be simpler than placing a finger — or with the modern miracle of multi-touch, multiple fingers — on a display?

And indeed, an entire industry of devices and form-factors — everything from phones, tablets, drafting-tables, all the way up to large wall displays — has arisen from this assumption.

Yet, if we unpack “touch” as it’s currently realized on most touchscreens, we can see that it remains very much a poor man’s version of natural human touch.

For example, on a large electronic-whiteboard such as the 84″ Surface Hub, multiple people can work upon the display at the same time. And it feels natural to employ both hands — as one often does in a wide assortment of everyday manual activities, such as indicating a point on a whiteboard with your off-hand as you emphasize the same point with the marker (or electronic pen).

Yet much of this richness — obvious to anyone observing a colleague at a whiteboard — represents context that is completely lost with “touch” as manifest in the vast majority of existing touch-screen devices.

For example:

  • Who is touching the display?
  • Are they touching the display with one hand, or two?
  • And if two hands, which of the multiple touch-events generated come from the right hand, and which come from the left?

Well, when dealing with input to computers, the all-too-common answer from the interaction designer is a shrug, a mumbled “who the heck knows,” and a litany of assumptions built into the user interface to try and paper over the resulting ambiguities, especially when the two factors (which user, and which hand) compound one another.

The result is that such issues tend to get swept under the rug, and hardly anybody ever mentions them.

But the first step towards a solution is recognizing that we have a problem.

This paper explores the implications of one particular solution that we have prototyped, namely leveraging wearable devices on the user’s body as sensors that can augment the richness of touch events.

A fitness band worn on the non-preferred hand, for example, can sense the impulse resulting from making finger-contact with a display through its embedded motion sensors (accelerometers and gyros). If the fitness band and the display exchange information and id’s, the touch-event generated can then be associated with the left hand of a particular user. The inputs of multiple users instrumented in this manner can then be separated from one another, as well, and used as a lightweight form of authentication.

That then explains the “wearable” part of “Wearables as Context for Guiard-abiding Bimanual Touch,” the title of my most recent paper, but what the heck does “Guiard-abiding” mean?

Well, this is a reference to classic work by a research colleague, Yves Guiard, who is famous for a 1987 paper in which he made a number of key observations regarding how people use their hands — both of them — in everyday manual tasks.

Particularly, in a skilled manipulative task such as writing on a piece of paper, Yves pointed out (assuming a right-handed individual) three general principles:

  • Left hand precedence: The action of the left hand precedes the action of the right; the non-preferred hand first positions and orients the piece of paper, and only then does the pen (held in the preferred hand, of course) begin to write.
  • Differentiation in scale: The action of the left hand tends to occur at a larger temporal and spatial scale of motion; the positioning (and re-positioning) of the paper tends to be infrequent and relatively coarse compared to the high-frequency, precise motions of the pen in the preferred hand.
  • Right-to-Left Spatial Reference: The left hand sets a frame of reference for the action of the right; the left hand defines the position and orientation of the work-space into which the preferred hand inserts its contributions, in this example via the manipulation of a hand-held implement — the pen.

Well, as it turns out these three principles are very deep and general, and they can yield great insight into how to design interactions that fully take advantage of people’s everyday skills for two-handed (“bimanual”) manipulation — another aspect of “touch” that interaction designers have yet to fully leverage for natural interaction with computers.

This paper is a long way from a complete solution to the paucity of modern touch-screens but hopefully by pointing out the problem and illustrating some consequences of augmenting touch with additional context (whether provided through wearables or other means), this work can lead to more truly “natural” touch interaction — allowing for simultaneous interaction by multiple users, both of whom can make full and complementary use of their hard-won manual skill with both hands — in the near future.


Wearables (fitness band and ring) provide missing context (who touches, and with what hand) for direct-touch bimanual interactions.Andrew M. Webb, Michel Pahud, Ken Hinckley, and Bill Buxton. 2016. Wearables as Context for Guiard-abiding Bimanual Touch. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 287-300. Tokyo, Japan, Oct. 16-19, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1145/2984511.2984564
[PDF] [Talk slides PDF] [Full video – MP4] [Watch 30 second preview on YouTube]

Advertisements

Book Chapter: Inking Outside the Box — How Context Sensing Affords More Natural Pen (and Touch) Computing

“Pen” and “Touch” are terms that tend to be taken for granted these days in the context of interaction with mobiles, tablets, and electronic-whiteboards alike.

Yet, as I have discussed in many articles here, even in the simplest combination of these modalities — that of “Pen + Touch” — new opportunities for interaction design abound.

And from this perspective we can go much further still.

Take “touch,” for example.

What does this term really mean in the context of input to computers?

Is it just when the user intentionally moves a finger into contact with the screen?

What if the palm accidentally brushes the display instead — is that still “touch?”

Or how about the off-hand, which plays a critical but oft-unnoticed role in gripping and skillfully orienting the device for the action of the preferred hand? Isn’t that an important part of “touch” as well?

Well, there’s good reason to argue that from the human perspective, these are all “touch,” even though most existing devices only generate a touch-event at the moment when a finger comes into contact with the screen.

Clearly, this is a very limited view, and clearly with greater insight of the context surrounding a particular touch (or pen, or pen + touch) event, we could enhance the naturalness of working with computers considerably.

This chapter, then, works through a series of examples and perspectives which demonstrate how much richness there is in such a re-conception of direct interaction with computers, and thereby suggests some directions for future innovations and richer, far more expressive interactions.


Thumbnail - Inking Outside the Box book chapterHinckley, K., Buxton, B., Inking Outside the Box: How Context Sensing Affords More Natural Pen (and Touch) Computing. 2016. Appears as Chapter 3 in Revolutionizing Education with Digital Ink: The Impact of Pen and Touch Technology on Education (Human-Computer Interaction Series), First Edition (2016). Ed. by Tracy Hammond, Stephanie Valentine, & Aaron Adler. Published by Springer, June 13, 2016.  [PDF – Author’s Draft]

P.S.: I’ve linked to the draft of the chapter that I submitted to the publisher, rather than the final version, as the published copy-edit muddied the writing by a gross misapplication of the Chicago Manual of Style, and in so doing introduced many semantic errors as well. Despite my best efforts I was not able to convince the publisher to fully reverse these undesired and unfortunate “improvements.” As such, my draft may contain some typographical errors or other minor discrepancies from the published version, but it is the authoritative version as far as I am concerned.

Paper: Pre-Touch Sensing for Mobile Interaction

I have to admit it: I feel as if I’m looking at the sunrise of what may be a whole new way of interacting with mobile devices.

When I think about it, the possibilities bathe my eyes in a golden glow, and the warmth drums against my skin.

And in particular, my latest research peers out across this vivid horizon, to where I see touch — and mobile interaction with touchscreens in particular — evolving in the near future.

As a seasoned researcher, my job (which in reality is some strange admixture of interaction design, innovator, and futurist) is not necessarily to predict the future, but rather to invent it via extrapolation from a sort of visionary present which occupies my waking dreams.

I see things not as they are, but as they could be, through the lens afforded by a (usually optimistic) extrapolation from extant technologies, or those I know are likely to soon become more widely available.

With regards to interaction with touchscreens in particular, it has been clear to me for some time that the ability to sense the fingers as they approach the device — well before contact with the screen itself — is destined to become commonplace on commodity devices.

This is interesting for a number of reasons.

And no, the ability to do goofy gestures above the screen, waving at it frantically (as if it were a fancy-pants towel dispenser in a public restroom) in some dim hope of receiving an affirmative response, is not one of them.

In terms of human capabilities, one obviously cannot touch the screen of a mobile device without approaching it first.

But what often goes unrecognized is that one also must hold the device, typically in the non-preferred hand, as a precursor to touch. Hence, how you hold the device — the pattern of your grip and which hand you hold it in — are additional details of context that are more-or-less wholly ignored by current mobile devices.

So in this new work, my colleagues and I collectively refer to these two precursors of touch — approach and the need to grip the device — as pre-touch.

And it is my staunch belief that the ability to sense such pre-touch information could radically transform the mobile ‘touch’ interfaces that we all have come to take for granted.

You can get a sense of these possibilities, all implemented on a fully functional mobile phone with pre-touch sensing capability, in our demo reel below:

The project received a lot of attention, and coverage from many of the major tech blogs and other media outlets, for example:

  • The Verge (“Microsoft’s hover gestures for Windows phones are magnificent”)
  • SlashGear (“Smartphones next big thing: ‘Pre-Touch’”)
  • Business Insider (“Apple should definitely copy Microsoft’s incredible finger-sensing smartphone technology”)
  • And Fast Company Design (and again in “8 Incredible Prototypes That Show The Future Of Human-Computer Interaction.”)

But I rather liked the take that Silicon Angle offered, which took my concluding statement from the video above:

Taken as a whole, our exploration of pre-touch hints that the evolution of mobile touch may still be in its infancy – with many possibilities, unbounded by the flatland of the touchscreen, yet to explore.

 And then responded as follows:

This is the moon-landing-esque conclusion Microsoft comes to after demonstrating its rather cool pre-touch mobile technology, i.e., a mobile phone that senses what your fingers are about to do.

While this evolution of touch has been coming in the research literature for at least a decade now, what exactly to do with above- and around-screen sensing (especially in a mobile setting) has been far from obvious. And that’s where I think our work on pre-touch sensing techniques for mobile interaction distinguishes itself, and in so doing identifies some very interesting use cases that have never been realized before.

The very best of these new techniques possess a quality that I love, namely that they have a certain surprising obviousness to them:

The techniques seem obvious — but only in retrospect.

And only after you’ve been surprised by the new idea or insight that lurks behind them.

If such an effort is indeed the first hint of a moonshot for touch, well, that’s a legacy for this project that I can live with.


UPDATE: The talk I gave at the CHI 2016 conference on this project is now available. Have a gander if you are so inclined.


 

Thumb sensed as it hovers over pre-touch mobile phoneKen Hinckley, Seongkook Heo, Michel Pahud, Christian Holz, Hrvoje Benko, Abigail Sellen, Richard Banks, Kenton O’Hara, Gavin Smyth, William Buxton. 2016. Pre-Touch Sensing for Mobile Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, p. 2869-2881. San Jose, CA, May 7-12, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858095

[PDF] [Talk slides PPTX] [video – MP4] [30 second preview – MP4] [Watch on YouTube]

Watch Pre-Touch Sensing for Mobile Interaction video on YouTube

 

Paper: Sensing Tablet Grasp + Micro-mobility for Active Reading

Lately I have been thinking about touch:

In the tablet-computer sense of the word.

To most people, this means the touchscreen. The intentional pokes and swipes and pinching gestures we would use to interact with a display.

But not to me.

Touch goes far beyond that.

Look at people’s natural behavior. When they refer to a book, or pass a document to a collaborator, there are two interesting behaviors that characterize the activity.

What I call the seen but unnoticed:

Simple habits and social cues, there all the time, but which fall below our conscious attention — if they are even noticed at all.

By way of example, let’s say we’re observing someone handle a magazine.

First, the person has to grasp the magazine. Seems obvious, but easy to overlook — and perhaps vital to understand. Although grasp typically doesn’t involve contact of the fingers with the touchscreen, this is a form of ‘touch’ nonetheless, even if it is one that traditionally hasn’t been sensed by computers.

Grasp reveals a lot about the intended use, whether the person might be preparing to pick up the magazine or pass it off, or perhaps settling down for a deep and immersive engagement with the material.

Second, as an inevitable consequence of grasping the magazine, it must move. Again, at first blush this seems obvious. But these movements may be overt, or they may be quite subtle. And to a keen eye — or an astute sensing system — they are a natural consequence of grasp, and indeed are what give grasp its meaning.

In this way, sensing grasp informs the detection of movements.

And, coming full circle, the movements thus detected enrich what we can glean from grasp as well.

Yet, this interplay of grasp and movement has rarely been recognized, much less actively sensed and used to enrich and inform interaction with tablet computers.

And this feeds back into a larger point that I have often found myself trying to make lately, namely that touch is about far more than interaction with the touch-screen alone.

If we want to really understand touch (as well as its future as a technology) then we need to deeply understand these other modalities — grasp and movement, and perhaps many more — and thereby draw out the full naturalness and expressivity of interaction with tablets (and mobile phones, and e-readers, and wearables, and many dreamed-of form-factors perhaps yet to come).

My latest publication looks into all of these questions, particularly as they pertain to reading electronic documents on tablets.

We constructed a tablet (albeit a green metallic beast of one at present) that can detect natural grips along its edges and on the entire back surface of the device. And with a full complement of inertial motion sensors, as well. This image shows the grip-sensing (back) side of our technological monstrosity:

Grip Sensing Tablet Hardware

But this set-up allowed us to explore ways of combining grip and subtle motion (what has sometimes been termed micro-mobility in the literature), resulting in the following techniques (among a number of others):

A Single User ENGAGING with a Single Device

Some of these techniques address the experience of an individual engaging with their own reading material.

For example, you can hold a bookmark with your thumb (much as you can keep your finger on a page in physical book) and then tip the device. This flips back to the page that you’re holding:

Tip-to-Flip-x715

This ‘Tip-to-Flip’ interaction  involves both the grip and the movement of the device and results in a fairly natural interaction that builds on a familiar habit from everyday experience with physical documents.

Another one we experimented with was a very subtle interaction that mimics holding a document and angling it up to inspect it more closely. When we sense this, the tablet zooms in slightly on the page, while removing all peripheral distractions such as menu-bars and icons:

Immersive Reading mode through grip sensing

This immerses the reader in the content, rather than the iconographic gewgaws which typically border the screen of an application as if to announce, “This is a computer!”

Multiple Users Collaborating around a Single Device

Another set of techniques we explored looked at how people pass devices to one another.

In everyday experience, passing a paper document to a collaborator is a very natural — and different — form of “sharing,” as compared to the oft-frustrating electronic equivalents we have at our disposal.

Likewise, computers should be able to sense and recognize such gestures in the real world, and use them to bring some of the socially and situationally appropriate sharing that they afford to the world of electronic documents.

We explored one such technique that automatically sets up a guest profile when you hand a tablet (displaying a specific document) to another user:

Face-to-Face-Handoff-x715

The other user can then read and mark-up that document, but he is not the beneficiary of a permanent electronic copy of it (as would be the case if you emailed him an attachment), nor is he permitted to navigate to other areas or look at other files on your tablet.

You’ve physically passed him the electronic document, and all he can do is look at it and mark it up with a pen.

Not unlike the semantics — long absent and sorely missed in computing — of a simple a piece of paper.

A Single User Working With Multiple Devices

A final area we looked at considers what happens when people work across multiple tablets.

We already live in a world where people own and use multiple devices, often side-by-side, yet our devices typically have little or no awareness of one another.

But contrast this to the messy state of people’s physical desks, with documents strewn all over. People often place documents side-by-side as a lightweight and informal way of organization, and might dexterously pick one up or hold it at the ready for quick reference when engaged in an intellectually demanding task.

Again, missing from the world of the tablet computer.

But by sensing which tablets you hold, or pick up, our system allows people to quickly refer to and cross-reference content across federations of such devices.

While the “Internet of Things” may be all the rage these days among the avant-garde of computing, such federations remain uncommon and in our view represent the future of a ‘Society of Devices’ that can recognize and interact with one another, all while respecting social mores, not the least of which are the subtle “seen but unnoticed” social cues afforded by grasping, moving, and orienting our devices.

Fine-Grained-Reference-x715

Closing ThoughtS:

An ExpanDED Perspective OF ‘TOUCH’

The examples above represent just a few simple steps. Much more can, and should, be done to fully explore and vet these directions.

But by viewing touch as far more than simple contact of the fingers with a grubby touchscreen — and expanding our view to consider grasp, movement of the device, and perhaps other qualities of the interaction that could be sensed in the future as well — our work hints at a far wider perspective.

A perspective teeming with the possibilities that would be raised by a society of mobile appliances with rich sensing capabilities, potentially leading us to far more natural, more expressive, and more creative ways of engaging in the knowledge work of the future.

 


 

Sensing-Tablet-Grasp-Micro-Mobility-UIST-2015-thumbDongwook Yoon, Ken Hinckley, Hrvoje Benko, François Guimbretière, Pourang Irani, Michel Pahud, and Marcel Gavriliu. 2015. Sensing Tablet Grasp + Micro-mobility for Active Reading. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software & Technology (UIST ’15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 477-487. Charlotte, NC, Nov. 8-11, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2807442.2807510
[PDF] [Talk slides PPTX] [video – MP4] [30 second preview – MP4] [Watch on YouTube]

Watch Sensing Tablet Grasp + Micro-mobility for Active Reading video on YouTube

Paper: Sensing Techniques for Tablet+Stylus Interaction (Best Paper Award)

It’s been a busy year, so I’ve been more than a little remiss in posting my Best Paper Award recipient from last year’s User Interface Software & Technology (UIST) symposium.

UIST is a great venue, particularly renowned for publishing cutting-edge innovations in devices, sensors, and hardware.

And software that makes clever uses thereof.

Title slide - sensing techniques for stylus + tablet interaction

Title slide from my talk on this project. We had a lot of help, fortunately. The picture illustrates a typical scenario in pen & tablet interaction — where the user interacts with touch, but the pen is still at the ready, in this case palmed in the user’s fist.

The paper takes two long-standing research themes for me — pen (plus touch) interaction, and interesting new ways to use sensors — and smashes them together to produce the ultimate Frankenstein child of tablet computing:

Stylus prototype augmented with sensors

Microsoft Research’s sensor pen. It’s covered in groovy orange shrink-wrap, too. What could be better than that? (The shrink wrap proved necessary to protect some delicate connections between our grip sensor and the embedded circuitry).

And if you were to unpack this orange-gauntleted beast, here’s what you’d find:

Sensor components inside the pen

Components of the sensor pen, including inertial sensors, a AAAA battery, a Wacom mini pen, and a flexible capacitive substrate that wraps around the barrel of the pen.

But although the end-goal of the project is to explore the new possibilities afforded by sensor technology, in many ways, this paper kneads a well-worn old worry bead for me.

It’s all about the hand.

With little risk of exaggeration you could say that I’ve spent decades studying nothing but the hand. And how the hand is the window to your mind.

Or shall I say hands. How people coordinate their action. How people manipulate objects. How people hold things. How we engage with the world through the haptic sense, how we learn to articulate astoundingly skilled motions through our fingers without even being consciously aware that we’re doing anything at all.

I’ve constantly been staring at hands for over 20 years.

And yet I’m still constantly surprised.

People exhibit all sorts of manual behaviors, tics, and mannerisms, hiding in plain sight, that seemingly inhabit a strange shadow-world — the realm of the seen but unnoticed — because these behaviors are completely obvious yet somehow they still lurk just beneath conscious perception.

Nobody even notices them until some acute observer takes the trouble to point them out.

For example:

Take a behavior as simple as holding a pen in your hand.

You hold the pen to write, of course, but most people also tuck the pen between their fingers to momentarily stow it for later use. Other people do this in a different way, and instead palm the pen, in more of a power grip reminiscent of how you would grab a suitcase handle. Some people even interleave the two behaviors, based on what they are currently doing and whether or not they expect to use the pen again soon:

Tuck and Palm Grips for temporarily stowing a pen

Illustration of tuck grip (left) vs. palm grip (right) methods of stowing the pen when it is temporarily not in use.

This seems very simple and obvious, at least in retrospect. But such behaviors have gone almost completely unnoticed in the literature, much less actively sensed by the tablets and pens that we use — or even leveraged to produce more natural user interfaces that can adapt to exactly how the user is currently handing and using their devices.

If we look deeper into these writing and tucking behaviors alone, a whole set of grips and postures of the hand emerge:

Core Pen Grips

A simple design space of common pen grips and poses (postures of the hand) in pen and touch computing with tablets.

Looking even more deeply, once we have tablets that support a pen as well as full multi-touch, users naturally want to used their bare fingers on the screen in combination with the pen, so we see another range of manual behaviors that we call extension grips based on placing one (or more) fingers on the screen while holding the pen:

Single Finger Extension Grips for Touch Gestures with Pen-in-hand

Much richness in “extension” grips, where touch is used while the pen is still being held, can also be observed. Here we see various single-finger extension grips for the tuck vs. the palm style of stowing the pen.

People also exhibited more ways of using multiple fingers on the touchscreen that I expected:

Multiple Finger Extension Grips for Touch Gestures with Pen-in-hand

Likewise, people extend multiple fingers while holding the pen to pinch or otherwise interact with the touchscreen.

So, it began to dawn on us that there was all this untapped richness in terms of how people hold, manipulate, write on, and extend fingers when using pen and touch on tablets.

And that sensing this could enable some very interesting new possibilities for the user interfaces for stylus + tablet computing.

This is where our custom hardware came in.

On our pen, for example, we can sense subtle motions — using full 3D inertial sensors including accelerometer, gyroscope, and magnetometer — as well as sense how the user grips the pen — this time using a flexible capacitive substrate wrapped around the entire barrel of the pen.

These capabilities then give rise to sensor signals such as the following:

Grip and motion sensors on the stylus
Sensor signals for the pen’s capacitive grip sensor with the writing grip (left) vs. the tuck grip (middle). Exemplar motion signals are shown on the right.

This makes various pen grips and motions stand out quite distinctly, states that we can identify using some simple gesture recognition techniques.

Armed with these capabilities, we explored presenting a number of context-appropriate tools.

As the very simplest example, we can detect when you’re holding the pen in a grip (and posture) that indicates that you’re about to write. Why does this matter? Well, if the touchscreen responds when you plant your meaty palm on it, it causes no end of mischief in a touch-driven user interface. You’ll hit things by accident. Fire off gestures by mistake. Leave little “ink turds” (as we affectionately call them) on the screen if the application responds to touch by leaving an ink trace. But once we can sense it’s your palm, we can go a long ways towards solving these problems with pen-and-touch interaction.

To pull the next little rabbit out of my hat, if you tap the screen with the pen in hand, the pen tools (what else?) pop up:

Pen tools appear

Tools specific to the pen appear when the user taps on the screen with the pen stowed in hand.

But we can take this even further, such as to distinguish bare-handed touches — to support the standard panning and zooming behaviors —  versus a pinch articulated with the pen-in-hand, which in this example brings up a magnifying glass particularly suited to detail work using the pen:

Pen Grip + Motion example: Full canvas zoom vs. Magnifier tool

A pinch multi-touch gesture with the left hand pans and zooms. But a pinch articulated with the pen-in-hand brings up a magnifier tool for doing fine editing work.

Another really fun way to use the sensors — since we can sense the 3D orientation of the pen even when it is away from the screen — is to turn it into a digital airbrush:

Airbrush tool using the sensors

Airbrushing with a pen. Note that the conic section of the resulting “spray” depends on the 3D orientation of the pen — just as it would with a real airbrush.

At any rate, it was a really fun project that garnered a best paper award,  and a fair bit of press coverage (Gizmodo, Engadget, & named FastCo Design’s #2 User Interface innovation of 2014, among other coverage). It’s pretty hard to top that.

Unless maybe we do a lot more with all kinds of cool sensors on the tablet as well.

Hmmm…

You might just want to stay tuned here. There’s all kinds of great stuff in the works, as always (grin).


Sensing Pen & Tablet Grip+Motion thumbnailHinckley, K., Pahud, M., Benko, H., Irani, P., Guimbretiere, F., Gavriliu, M., Chen, X., Matulic, F., Buxton, B., Wilson, A., Sensing Techniques for Tablet+Stylus Interaction.  In the 27th ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST’14)  Honolulu, Hawaii, Oct 5-8, 2014, pp. 605-614. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2642918.2647379

Watch Context Sensing Techniques for Tablet+Stylus Interaction video on YouTube

Award: CHI Academy, 2014 Inductee

I’ve been a bit remiss in posting this, but as of April 2014, I’m a member of the CHI Academy, which is an honorary group that recognizes leaders in the field of Human-Computer interaction.

Among whom I can apparently I now include myself, strange as that  may seem.

I was completely surprised by this and can honestly say I never expected any special recognition. I’ve just been plugging away on my little devices and techniques, writing papers here and there, but I suppose over the decades it all adds up. I don’t know if this means that my work is especially good or that I’m just getting older, but either way I appreciate the gesture of recognition from my peers in the field.

I was in a bit of a ribald mood when I got the news, so when the award organizers asked me to reply with my bio I decided what the heck and decided to have some fun with it:

Ken Hinckley is a Principal Researcher at Microsoft Research, where he has spent the last 17 years investigating novel input devices, device form-factors, and modalities of interaction.

He feels fortunate to have had the opportunity to collaborate with many CHI Academy members while working there, including noted trouble-makers such as Bill Buxton, Patrick Baudisch, and Eric Horvitz—as well as George Robertson, whom he owes a debt of gratitude for hiring him fresh out of grad school.

Ken is perhaps best know for his work on sensing techniques, cross-device interaction, and pen computing. He has published over 75 academic papers and is a named inventor on upwards of 150 patents. Ken holds a Ph.D. in Computer Science from the University of Virginia, where he studied with Randy Pausch.

He has also published fiction in professional markets including Nature and Fiction River, and prides himself on still being able to hit 30-foot jump shots at age 44.

Not too shabby.

Now, in the spirit of full disclosure, there are no real perks associated with being a CHI Academy member as far as I’ve been able to figure. People do seem to ask me for reference letters just a tiny bit more frequently. And I definitely get more junk email from organizers of dubious-sounding conferences than before. No need for research heroics if you want a piece of that, just email me and I’d be happy to forward them along.

But the absolute most fun part of the whole deal was a small private celebration that noted futurist Bill Buxton organized at his ultra-modern home fronting Lake Ontario in Toronto, and where I was joined by my Microsoft Research colleagues Abigail Sellen, her husband Richard Harper, and John Tang. Abi is already a member (and an occasional collaborator whom I consider a friend), and Richard and John were inducted along with me into the Academy in 2014.

Bill Buxton needs no introduction among the avant garde of computing. And he’s well known in the design community as well, not to mention publishing on equestrianism and mountaineering, among other topics. In particular, his collection of interactive devices is arguably the most complete ever assembled. Only a tiny fraction of it is currently documented on-line. It contains everything from the world’s first radio and television remote controls, to the strangest keyboards ever conceived by mankind, and even the very first handcrafted wooden computer mice that started cropping up in the 1960’s.

The taxi dropped me off, I rang the doorbell, and when a tall man with rock-star hair gone gray and thinned precipitously by the ravages of time answered the door, I inquired:

“Is this, by any chance, the Buxton Home for Wayward Input Devices?”

To which Bill replied in the affirmative.

I indeed had the right place, I would fit right in here, and he showed me in.

Much of Bill’s collection lives off the premises, but his below-ground sanctum sanctorum was still walled by shelves bursting with transparent tubs packed with handheld gadgets that had arrived far before their time, historical mice and trackballs, and hybrid bastard devices of every conceivable description. And what little space remained was packed with books on design, sketching, and the history of mountaineering and the fur trade.

Despite his home office being situated below grade, natural light poured down into it through the huge front windows facing the inland sea, owing to the home’s modern design. Totally awesome space and would have looked right at home on the front page of Architectural Digest.

Bill showed us his origami kayak on the back deck, treated us all to some hand-crafted martinis in the open-plan kitchen, and arranged for transportation to the awards dinner via a 10-person white stretch limousine. We even made a brief pit stop so Bill could dash out and pick up a bottle of champagne at a package store.

Great fun.

I’ve known Bill since 1994, when he visited Randy Pausch’s lab at the University of Virginia, and ever since people have often assumed that he was my advisor. He never was in any official capacity, but I read all of his papers in that period and in many ways I looked up to him as my research hero. And now that we’ve worked together as colleagues for nearly 10 years (!), and with Randy’s passing, I often do still see him as a mentor.

Or is that de-mentor?

Probably a little bit of each, in all honesty (grin).

Yeah, the award was pretty cool and all, but it was the red carpet thrown out by Bill that I’ll always remember.

Thumbnail - Ken Hinckley CHI Academy 2014 InducteeHinckley, K., CHI Academy. Inducted April 27th, 2014 at CHI 2014 in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, for career research accomplishments and service to the ACM SIGCHI community (Association of Computing Machinery’s Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction). [Ken Hinckley CHI Academy Bio] 

The CHI Academy is an honorary group of individuals who have made substantial contributions to the field of human-computer interaction. These are the principal leaders of the field, whose efforts have shaped the disciplines and/or industry, and led the research and/or innovation in human-computer interaction. The criteria for election to the CHI Academy are:

  • Cumulative contributions to the field.
  • Impact on the field through development of new research directions and/or innovations.
  • Influence on the work of others.
  • Reasonably active participant in the ACM SIGCHI community.

Book Chapter: Input/Output Devices and Interaction Techniques, Third Edition

Thumbnail for Computing Handbook (3rd Edition)Hinckley, K., Jacob, R., Ware, C. Wobbrock, J., and Wigdor, D., Input/Output Devices and Interaction Techniques. Appears as Chapter 21 in The Computing Handbook, Third Edition: Two-Volume Set, ed. by Tucker, A., Gonzalez, T., Topi, H., and Diaz-Herrera, J. Published by Chapman and Hall/CRC (Taylor & Francis), May 13, 2014.  [PDF – Author’s Draft – may contain discrepancies]