IWAAL 2013 - Mobile NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction: Architecture Proposal and Evaluation

Mobile NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction:
Architecture Proposal and Evaluation
IWAAL 2013

Pablo Curiel, Koldo Zabaleta, Ana B. Lago
DeustoTech - Deusto Institute of Technology, University of Deusto
http://www.morelab.deusto.es

December 3, 2013

NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction

1/38

Outline

Introduction
State of the Art

The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion


2/38

Outline

Introduction
State of the Art

The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion


3/38

Advances in ICTs

►

Increasing number of electronic devices with noticeable
computing capabilities.


Introduction

4/38

Advances in ICTs

►
►

Increasing number of electronic devices with noticeable
computing capabilities.
Wide range of advanced services offered.


Introduction

5/38

Usability issues

►

Yet accessing these services can be troublesome…


Introduction

6/38


7/38


8/38

Outline

Introduction
State of the Art

The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion


9/38

Related Projects

►
►
►

Several studies have used NFC-enabled phones to ease
the interaction with them and provide different services.
Common approach: Each NFC tag identifies a given
service that is fired when the tag is read.
Extensions to it:
► General

tags which identify objects and special tags with
additional information or services that those objects provide
(Riekki et al.).
► User context as additional condition to determine which
service to provide (Riekki et al.).
► Tags that identify services and tags that identify arguments
for them. (Broll et al.).

State of the Art

10/38

Our Proposal

A tag represents an object or concept of the
real world, not a particular service. Thus, it is
the combination of tags read by a user what
determines the service to be provided.


State of the Art

11/38

Outline

Introduction
State of the Art

The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion


12/38

The Platform

►

Activate the most used services on mobile devices by
interacting with NFC tags.

►

Client-Server architecture

►

Three main components:
► The

Model
► The Server
► The Mobile Application


Proposed Solution

13/38

The Model

►

OWL Ontology where two kinds of elements are modelled.


Proposed Solution

14/38

The Model

►

► Real

world entities to be represented on NFC tags


Proposed Solution

15/38

The Model

►

► Real


► Hierarchy


Proposed Solution

16/38

The Model

►

► Real


► Hierarchy

► The

actions to execute


Proposed Solution

17/38

The Model

►

► Real


► Hierarchy

► The

actions to execute

►A

combination of different number and types of tags

hasTag exactly 1
EmailTag

EmailTag

SendEmail

hasAttribute min 1
Contact

Proposed Solution

Contact

18/38

The Server

►

Checks if the combination of tags read by the user is
valid…
And if so, it determines the action they represent.

►

Two steps:

►

► The

Rule Engine
► Consistency Checking


Proposed Solution

19/38

The Server – The Rule Engine

One rule per action or service available.
► Each rule checks if the information of the tags read
matches, in principle, to its corresponding action.
► If so, it creates an instance of that action and with the
attributes that apply in each case.
►

Telephone
And
Contact
instances


Rule
Engine

Proposed Solution

Telephone
action
with associated
Contact

20/38

The Server –Consistency Checking

►

Once an action with its corresponding attributes is
created, its consistency is checked.
► Types

of the attributes
► Cardinality of the attributes

TelephoneCall
Telephone
action
with associated
Contact

Semantic
Reasoner

hasAttribute
exactly 1
Contact

Contact


Proposed Solution

21/38

The Server –Consistency Checking

►

Once an action with its corresponding attributes is
created, its consistency is checked.
► Types

of the attributes
► Cardinality of the attributes
►

Consistent Action = Valid Action
TelephoneCall
Telephone
action
with associated
Contact

Semantic
Reasoner

Consistent!


hasAttribute
exactly 1
Contact

Contact

Proposed Solution

22/38

The Mobile Application – Object Creation

►

The representation of the objects in the tags follows the
ontological model.


Proposed Solution

23/38


►

ontological model.

<PlaceTagUri>


Proposed Solution

24/38


►

ontological model.

<PlaceTagUri> <rdf:type> <lnfc:PlaceTag> .
<PlaceTagUri> <lnfc:latitude> “51.513016”^^xsd:double .
<PlaceTagUri> <lnfc:longitude> “-0.122337”^^xsd:double .


Proposed Solution

25/38

The Mobile Application – Action Execution

►

When a user reads a combination of tags to execute an
action, the URIs written on them are used to retrieve the
instance from the triplestore.

►

The retrieved instances are sent to the server, which
determines the action to execute.

►

Finally, the mobile phone provides the service that
corresponds according to the action returned by the
server.


Proposed Solution

26/38

Outline

Introduction
State of the Art

The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion


27/38

Evaluation

►

Goals
► Validate

our proposal
► Compare it to traditional Touchscreen-based interaction
►

Hypothesis: Interaction based on NFC is faster and
easier for end-users than the touchscreen- based one.


Evaluation

28/38

Experiment design

►

Subjects executed three different actions, both with NFC
and an ad-hoc touchscreen-based GUI.
► See

weather forecast (no params)
► Make a phone call to a contact (one param)
► Send an e-mail to two contacts (two params)


Evaluation

29/38

NFC-based Interaction


Evaluation

30/38


31/38

Touchscreen-based Interaction


Evaluation

32/38

Experiment steps

Application explanation
► Live demo
► Training for one subject group
► Subjects executed the actions
►

► Half

of the subjects first with NFC, the other first with
touchscreen

►

Post-experiment survey
► Age,

Gender, Familiarity with NFC/Touchscreen
phones/New technologies in general and subjective
impressions


Evaluation

33/38

Subject characteristics

40 Subjects
► Between 20 and 60 years old
►


Evaluation

34/38


40 Subjects
► 30 men and 10 women
► Varied technological skills
►


Evaluation

35/38


40 Subjects
► 30 men and 10 women
► Varied technological skills
► 80% owned a touchscreen phone
► 66% familiar with NFC/RFID
►

► But

►

only 33% had used a NFC-enabled phone

15 subjects trained with the application before the
experiment


Evaluation

36/38

Subject characteristics - Dependencies

►

Age and technological skills
► Older

subjects took less advantage of their smartphones


Evaluation

37/38


►

► Older

►


Age and phone type
► All

subjects under 40 owned a smartphone


Evaluation

38/38


►

► Older

►

Age and phone type
► All

►

subjects under 40 owned a smartphone

Age and experience with NFC
► None

►


of the older subjects had used a NFC phone before

Phone type and experience with NFC
► Only

one subject with prior experience with a NFC phone
owned a non-touchscreen phone


Evaluation

39/38

Subject impressions

►
►

Nearly all subjects found the NFC-based interaction
useful
75% of the subjects would use it at least occasionally


Evaluation

40/38

Task efficiency

►

NFC 0.5 seconds faster on average

►

No significant difference between the different actions
21 subjects faster with NFC / 19 faster with touchscreen
Pre-experiment training equal for both interaction
approaches

►
►

► Subjects

with training were 2 seconds faster on average
with both technologies.

►

No correlation between subjective impressions and task
efficiency


Evaluation

41/38

Task efficiency (II)

►

Significant correlation between task efficiency and
subject age
► Specially
► 630

ms slower per year increase (P < 0.001)

► Weaker
► 333

for touch-based interaction

for NFC

ms slower per year increase (P < 0.01)


Evaluation

42/38

Task efficiency (III)

►

Interaction time differences (touchscreen time minus
NFC time for each subject and task)
► For

each year increase in subject age, they are 300 ms
faster with NFC (P ≈ 0.001)
► On average, subjects older than 30 are faster with NFC


Evaluation

43/38

Task efficiency (IV)

►

Subjects who own a touchscreen-phone are clearly
faster with this kind of interaction
► 18

►

seconds faster on average (P < 0.001)

While it is not that clear that subjects with previous
experience with a NFC phone are faster
►6

seconds faster on average (P ≈ 0.05)


Evaluation

44/38

Outline

Introduction
State of the Art

The Platform
Evaluation
Conclusion


45/38

Conclusion (I)

►

Platform to access the most-used services in mobile
phones using NFC.

►

New approach for NFC-based interaction: Actions as
combinations of tags.

►

Proposed interaction scheme considered convenient and
useful by test users.


Conclusion

46/38

Conclusion (II)

►

NFC also proved faster than touchscreen, specially for…
► Older

people (over 30 years old)
► Those less familiar with touch-based interaction
► Those less familiar with new technologies in general
►

Learning curve of NFC-based interaction also proved to
be low.


Conclusion

47/38

Future Work

►

Run a larger scale experiment
► Larger

number of subjects, more homogeneous groups

► More

subjects in older age groups
► More people with lower technological skills
► Minimize

►

dependency among variables

Longer in time
► Study

the long-term learning effect in both interaction
approaches

►

Apart from studying task efficiency, measure interaction
errors with both technologies


Conclusion

48/38

¡GRACIAS!

THANK YOU!


49/38

All rights of images are reserved by the original
owners*, the rest of the content is licensed under a
Creative Commons by-sa 3.0 license.

*

Android Open Source Project: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nexus_4.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nexus_10.png
Stefan Svartling: https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/LJ44WQRTFlHX5ciB_xLV8lDUMCdxqHK-2KnxRTTdAcc
Google Inc.: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Google_Chrome_icon_(2011).svg
Photoshopedia: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/33896/camera_photography_webdesign_icon
Wwalczyszyn: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/67500/android_maps_r_icon
Aha-Soft:
https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/54522/feed_garbage_good_tidings_journal_lection_literary_garbage_mandarin_mandarine_news_newspaper_or
ange_organ_paper_print_read_reader_reading_retiree_rss_sheet_slipslop_tangerine_tidings_uncos_yellow_icon
https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/54526/community_connection_consultation_consulting_earth_global_group_internet_large_group_network_polar
_round_table_social_social_network_users_world_icon
Alessandro Rei: http://findicons.com/icon/254687/audacity
Oliver Scholtz (and others): https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/24246/and_calendar_preferences_tasks_icon
Bharathp666: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/72149/android_base_gmail_icon
Juan José Aza: http://www.flickr.com/photos/todojuanjo/2630161117/
Chris Arvin: http://dribbble.com/shots/396641-Freebie-PSD-Android-4-0-UI?list=users
W3C: http://www.w3.org/RDF/icons/rdf_flyer.svg
TAPPIN: http://tappinn.com/public/images/main2011/nfc-sticker.jpg
Icons Land: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/73049/base_chartreuse_inside_map_marker_socialmediabookmark_icon
Everaldo Coelho: https://www.iconfinder.com/icons/18095/clouds_sun_weather_icon


50/38

Mobile NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction:
Architecture Proposal and Evaluation
Koldo Zabaleta

{koldo.zabaleta@deusto.es}
DeustoTech - Deusto Institute of Technology, University of Deusto
http://www.morelab.deusto.es


51/38

IWAAL 2013 - Mobile NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction: Architecture Proposal and Evaluation

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (16)

Ähnlich wie IWAAL 2013 - Mobile NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction: Architecture Proposal and Evaluation

Ähnlich wie IWAAL 2013 - Mobile NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction: Architecture Proposal and Evaluation (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

IWAAL 2013 - Mobile NFC vs Touchscreen Based Interaction: Architecture Proposal and Evaluation