Advertisement

The Interaction Specification Workspace: Specifying and Designing the Interaction Issues of Virtual Reality Training Environments From Within

  • C. N. Diplas
  • A. D. Kameas
  • P. E. Pintelas
Conference paper
Part of the Eurographics book series (EUROGRAPH)

Abstract

Advances in Virtual Reality (VR) systems, Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Agent Technology make it possible to design and develop Virtual Training Environments (VTEs), where the trainees can immerse themselves and interact directly with the learning domain. This paper presents the Interaction Specification Workspace (ISW) architecture for the specification and design of virtual environments for training purposes. ISW architecture provides the interaction designer with the capability to specify the training interaction with the virtual environment using the Virtual Reality Multi Flow Graph (VR-MFG) as the underlying interaction specification model. ISW implements a design space, where the processes of interaction specification and design of VTEs take place inside a three-dimensional virtual environment, the objects of which are tools by themselves. Inside this workspace, the designer can associate the abstract objects (the components of the VR-MFG) with “actual” objects of the target virtual environment (kept in a “world” database) and apply a number of agent templates with training capabilities.

Keywords

Virtual Reality Virtual Environment Interaction Technique Context Actor Guide Actor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Accot, J., Chatty, S., Maury, S., Palanque, P., “Formal transducers: models of devices and building bricks for highly interactive systems”. In (informal) Proceedings of 4th Eurographics Workshop on Design, Specification and Verification of Interactive Systems, June 4-6, 1997, Spain, pp.155–168.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beale, R., Wood, A., “Agent-Based Interaction”, in People and Computers IXProceedings of HCI ’94, Glaskow, UK, August 1994, pp. 239 – 245.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bell, G., Parisi, A. and Pesce, M., “Virtual Reality Modeling Language: Version 1.0 Specification”, May 26, 1995.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benford, S. et al., “From Rooms to Cyberspace: Models of Interaction in Large Virtual Computer Spaces”, in Interacting with Computers (Butterworth-Heinmann), 1993.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Billinghurst, M. & Savage, J. (1996). Adding Intelligence to the Interface. In Proceedings of the IEEE 1996 Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium (pp. 168 – 176 ). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bolzoni, M. L. G., “Eliciting a Context for Rules of Interaction: A Taxonomy of Metaphors for Human-Objects Communication in Virtual and Synthetic Environments”, Proceedings of the 2nd UK VR-SIG and Contributors, December, 1, 1994, Reading, UK, pp. 78–87.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bowman, D. A., and Hodges, L. F. “User interface constraints for immersive virtual environment applications”, TR GIT-GVU-95-26, Graphics, Visualisation and Usability Center, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA, 1995.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bricken, M. and Byrne, C. M., Summer Students In Virtual Reality: A Pilot Study On Educational Applications Of Virtual Reality Technology, (unpublished paper) Human Interface Technology Laboratory (HITL) of the Washington Technology Center (WTC) at the University of Washington (UW), 1992.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burks, L., “Information Architecture: The Representation of Virtual Environments”, Harvard University Graduate School of Design, Thesis Document, May 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Card S., K., Robertson, G., G., Mackinley, J., D., Information Visualizer, An Information Workspace, Proceedings of SIGCHI 1991, pp. 181 – 188.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Deering, M., The HoloScetch VR sketching system, Communications of the ACM, Vol 39, No 5, May 1996, pp. 54 – 61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Diplas C., Giakovis D., Pintelas P., “DrIVE: A Virtual Training Environment For Driving Behaviour”, in Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computers and Advanced Technologies in Education (CATE 96), pp. 191–200, March 18-20, 1996, Cairo, Egypt.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fuchs, J., and Bishop, G., “Research Directions in Virtual Environments. An Invitational Workshop on the Future of Virtual Environments”. TR92–027, March 1992, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Department of Computer Science.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gobbetti, E., Balaguer, J., F., VB2 An Architecture for Interaction in Synthetic Worlds, Proceedings of UIST’93, November 3-5, Atlanta, Georgia, 1993, pp. 167 – 178.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hall, A., “Do interactive systems need specifications?”, In (informal) Proceedings of 4th Eurographics Workshop on Design, Specification and Verification of Interactive Systems, June 4-6, 1997, Spain, pp.3–14.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Harrison, M., D., and Duke, D., J., “A Review of Formalisms for Describing Interactive Behavior”, Amodeus Project Document: System Modelling/WP28, January 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hill, R.W., Johnson, W.L., “Situated Plan Attribution”, Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, (6)1, pp. 35 – 67, 1995.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Johnson, W.L, W.L., “Pedagogical Agents for Virtual Learning Environments”, Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education, pages 41–48, Singapore, 1995.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kameas, A., “A Formal Model for the Specification of Interaction and the Design of Interactive Applications”. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Computer Engineering, University of Patras, Greece, 1995.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kameas, A., Diplas, C., Gerogiannis, V. and Pintelas, P., “Encapsulating multiple perspectives in interaction specification”. Proceedings of 20th EUROMICRO Conference, Liverpool, England, September 5 – 10, 1994.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Laurel, B., Computers as Theatre, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., Reading, Massachusetts, 1993, p. 32.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mikropoulos, A., Diplas C., Giakovis, D., Halkidis, A., Pintelas, P., “Virtual Reality & Education: New Tool or New Methodology?”, Proceedings of 2nd Conference on Informatics in Education, pp.57-67, November, 11–13, 1994, Athens, Hellas.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mikropoulos, A., Diplas C., Giakovis, D., Halkidis, A., Pintelas, P., “Virtual Reality & Education: New Tool or New Methodology?”, Proceedings of 2nd Conference on Informatics in Education, pp.57-67, November, 11–13, 1994, Athens, Hellas.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pausch, R., et al, “Disney’s Aladdin: First Steps Toward Storytelling in Virtual Reality”, Proceedings of Computer Graphics, Annual Conference Series, pp. 193 – 203, 1996.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Poupyrev, I., Billinghurst, M., Weghorst, S., & Ichikawa, T. (1996). The Go-Go Interaction Technique: Non-linear Mapping for Direct Manipulation in VR. In Proceedings of UIST ’96 (pp. 79 – 80 ). New York, NY: ACMCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rickel, J., and Johnson, W., L., “Integrating Pedagogical Capabilities in a Virtual Environment Agent”, to be presented in First International Conference on Autonomous Agents, February 1997.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shaw, C, Green, M., Liang J. and Sun, Y., Decoupled Simulation in Virtual Reality with the MRToolkit. ACM Trans. On Information Systems (11–3), July 1993, p. 287.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Snowdon, D. N., West, A. J. and Howard T. L. J., “Towards the next generation of Human-Computer Interface”, Proceedings of Informatique ’93: Interface to Real & Virtual Worlds, 26-26th March 1993, Montpellier, France, pp. 399–408.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Snowdon, D., West, A., “The AVIARY Distibuted Virtual Environment”, Proceedings of the 2nd UK VR-SIG and Contributors, December, 1, 1994, Reading, UK, pp. 39–54.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Stoakley, R., Conway, M., J., Pausch, R.. Virtual Reality on a WIM: Interactive Worlds in Miniature. In Proceedings of ACM CHI95, Denver-USA, May 7–11 1995.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sturman, J. and Zeltzer, D., A Design Method for “Whole-Hand” Human- Computer Interaction. ACM Trans. On Information Systems (11–3), July 1993, pp. 219 – 238.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Tambe, M., et. Al., “Intelligent Agents for interactive simulation environments”. Al Magazine, 16(1), pp. 15-39, Spring 1995.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    VRT 3.60, Superscape Ltd., Reference Manual.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Ware, C., Franck, G., “Viewing a graph in a Virtual Reality Display is Three Times as Good as a 2D Diagram”, Proceedings of 1994 IEEE Conference on Visual Languages, S. Louis, Missouri, USA, October, 1994, pp. 182 – 183.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ware, C., Franck, G., “Viewing a graph in a Virtual Reality Display is Three Times as Good as a 2D Diagram”, Proceedings of 1994 IEEE Conference on Visual Languages, S. Louis, Missouri, USA, October, 1994, pp. 182 – 183.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    World Up, Sense8 Corporation., User & Reference Manual, 1996.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag/Wien 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. N. Diplas
    • 1
    • 2
  • A. D. Kameas
    • 1
  • P. E. Pintelas
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Educational Software Development Laboratory, Department of MathematicsUniversity of PatrasGreece
  2. 2.Division of Computational Mathematics and Informatics, Department of MathematicsUniversity of PatrasGreece

Personalised recommendations