Clin. Invest. 1994.93:1397-1402

No abstract

No abstract

Figure 1.a) The Roly-Poly Mouse (RPM) gestures. RPM can be used for b) 2D pointing; c-d) 3D translation by combining RPM translation and roll; e) and 3D rotation by combining RPM roll and rotation. ABSTRACTWe present the design and evaluation of the Roly-Poly Mouse (RPM), a rolling input device that combines the advantages of the mouse (position displacement) and of 3D devices (roll and rotation) to unify 2D and 3D interaction. Our first study explores RPM gesture amplitude and stability for different upper shapes (Hemispherical, Convex) and hand postures. 8 roll directions can be performed precisely and their amplitude is larger on Hemispherical RPM. As minor rolls affect translation, we propose a roll correction algorithm to support stable 2D pointing with RPM. We propose the use of compound gestures for 3D pointing and docking, and evaluate them against a commercial 3D device, the SpaceMouse. Our studies reveal that RPM performs 31% faster than the SpaceMouse for 3D pointing and equivalently for 3D rotation. Finally, we present a proof-of-concept integrated RPM prototype along with discussion on the various technical challenges to overcome to build a final integrated version of RPM.

In this paper, we present the "Around the SmartPhone" interaction technique for manipulating 3D elements displayed on a distant screen. The design of the technique is based on the selection of the most appropriate value for characteristics useful to discriminate existing tactile and tangible techniques for 3D manipulations. We perform two user studies to compare this around-device technique for translating and rotating 3D objects, with two existing tangible and tactile solutions, in terms of performance and user's preference. The literature establishes that the tactile technique evaluated is the best tactile technique among the existing tactile techniques for 3D manipulation. Despite this result, our user study reveals that the two others perform significantly better. In addition, when feedback visibility is preserved, the around-device technique offers similar performance results than the tangible one. Finally, the around-device technique is significantly preferred over the two others in every condition.