Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 381

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Precise selection techniques for multi-touch screens

Benko, Hrvoje, Wilson, Andrew D., Baudisch, Patrick·2006·Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

Abstract

The size of human fingers and the lack of sensing precision can make precise touch screen interactions difficult. We present a set of five techniques, called Dual Finger Selections, which leverage the recent development of multi-touch sensitive displays to help users select very small targets. These techniques facilitate pixel-accurate targeting by adjusting the control-display ratio with a secondary finger while the primary finger controls the movement of the cursor. We also contribute a "clicking" technique, called SimPress, which reduces motion errors during clicking and allows us to simulate a hover state on devices unable to sense proximity. We implemented our techniques on a multi-touch tabletop prototype that offers computer vision-based tracking. In our formal user study, we tested the performance of our three most promising techniques (Stretch, X-Menu, and Slider) against our baseline (Offset), on four target sizes and three input noise levels. All three chosen techniques outperformed the control technique in terms of error rate reduction and were preferred by our participants, with Stretch being the overall performance and preference winner.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/1124772.1124963

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Benko, H., Wilson, A. D., & Baudisch, P.
Venue
Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Publisher
ACM
Published
2006-04-22
Pages
1263-1272
OpenAlex
W2096986574
Cited by
381
References
0
FWCI
19.94
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.