Context-Aware Online Adaptation of Mixed Reality Interfaces
Open accessAbstract
We present an optimization-based approach for Mixed Reality (MR) systems to automatically control when and where applications are shown, and how much information they display. Currently, content creators design applications, and users then manually adjust which applications are visible and how much information they show. This choice has to be adjusted every time users switch context, i.e., whenever they switch their task or environment. Since context switches happen many times a day, we believe that MR interfaces require automation to alleviate this problem. We propose a real-time approach to automate this process based on users' current cognitive load and knowledge about their task and environment. Our system adapts which applications are displayed, how much information they show, and where they are placed. We formulate this problem as a mix of rule-based decision making and combinatorial optimization which can be solved efficiently in real-time. We present a set of proof-of-concept applications showing that our approach is applicable in a wide range of scenarios. Finally, we show in a dual-task evaluation that our approach decreased secondary tasks interactions by 36%.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The NASA-TLX questionnaire is susceptible to individual biases through user expectations, leading to improved assessments of user interfaces by belief and placebos.
“Furthermore, the NASA-TLX questionnaire is susceptible to individual biases through user expectations, leading to improved assessments of user interfaces by belief and placebos [136].”
From A Survey on Measuring Cognitive Workload in Human-Computer Interaction (2023) · cites this paper as [136]
Cites
Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research
(1988) · Advances in Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9 · Cited by 15,003 · see citing works
Cognitive Load During Problem Solving: Effects on Learning
Sweller, J. (1988) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1016/0364-0213(88)90023-7 · Cited by 11,048 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Sweller [44]) states that humans only have a fnite amount of cognitive processing capacity.”
BackgroundIntegrating cognitive load theory and concepts of human–computer interaction
Hollender, N., Hofmann, C., Deneke, M., & Schmitz, B. (2010) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.05.031 · Cited by 328 · see citing works
Bailey, B. P., & Iqbal, S. T. (2008) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/1314683.1314689 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
The Index of Cognitive Activity: measuring cognitive workload
Marshall, S. P. (2003) · Proceedings of the IEEE 7th Conference on Human Factors and Power Plants · doi:10.1109/hfpp.2002.1042860 · Cited by 266 · see citing works
Yuksel, B. F., Oleson, K. B., Harrison, L., Peck, E. M., Afergan, D., Chang, R., & Jacob, R. J. (2016) · Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2858036.2858388 · Cited by 137 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Existing approaches exploit this knowledge e. g., to schedule interrupts (e. g., Bailey et al. [3]) or to adapt user interfaces (e. g., Yuksel et al. [47]).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A Survey on Measuring Cognitive Workload in Human-Computer Interaction
Kosch, T., Karolus, J., Zagermann, J., Reiterer, H., Schmidt, A., & Woźniak, P. W. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3582272 · Cited by 304 · see citing works
“Pupil Diameter [4, 5, 9–11, 18–22, 27, 28, 39, 44–47, 55, 58, 62, 63, 72, 87, 92, 94, 99, 103, 107, 108, 112, 142, 143, 153, 154, 157, 165, 175, 187–189, 195, 199–201, 207, 215, 227, 236, 239, 248, 249, 255, 257, 266] Saccades [10, 21, 27, 44–47, 76, 87, 99, 165, 184, 193, 228, 236, 258] Eye Blinks…”
- Authors
- Lindlbauer, D., Feit, A. M., & Hilliges, O.
- Affiliations
- ETH Zurich (CH)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2019-10-17
- Pages
- 147-160
- OpenAlex
- W2980956911
- Cited by
- 254
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 65 · 2024: 54 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 12
- FWCI
- 13.97
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Locations
- ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (UIST) (publishedVersion)
- Repository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- ETH Zürich Research Collection
- Funders
- European Research Council (StG-2016-717054 (OPTINT))
- ETH Zurich Postdoctoral Fellowship Programme (ETH/Cofund 18-1 FEL-39)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Interactive and Immersive Displays
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Augmented Reality Applications
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Keywords
- mixed reality interfaces, contextual adaptation, cognitive load, real-time optimization, combinatorial optimization, rule-based decision making, dual-task performance, secondary task interference
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