2006-03-07

Get rejected by DIS2006

去年年底很自不量力地把當時未完成的 Ambient Trigger 改寫成 10 頁的 ACM 研討會論文格式, 丟到兩年一度超硬的 DIS2006 (Designing Interactive Systems). 剛才收到結果通知, 沒上.

事實上, 在兩年前剛入學的時候, 曾經和博士班的某位學長一起丟過 DIS2004. 那一次收到 reviewer 的 comments 之後, 有點被嗆到了, 勵志要在兩年後, 也就是 DIS2006 一定要投上. 沒想到, 兩年很快地過去了, 事實證明我要投上 ACM SIGCHI 的長篇研討會論文還很早.

四位 reviewer 當中, Reviewer No.1, No.2, No.4 給我 REJECT, 令人欣慰的是, Reviewer No.3 給了我 STRONG ACCEPT, 且在諸多評分項目中給我 8~9 的高分. 但相對的 Reviewer No.4 很嚴厲地, 給我最高不超過 3 分, 而且有四項 (技術健全性/技術重要性/文章品質/總體分數) 只給我 1 分. 從他們各自給的評語來猜, 我在想可能是因為他們領域背景不同所致, 所以看問題側重的角度不同. 不過, 相較於第一次丟 DIS2004 被 "strong reject" 的經驗, 這次的 review 結果, 還算是有進步啦 (自我安慰一下).

至於平均分數, 相關性 (Relevance) 是 6.2 分, 技術健全性 (Technical Soundness) 3.5 分, 技術重要性 (Technical Importance) 4.5 分, 原創性 (Originality) 6.2 分, 文章品質 (Quality of Presentation) 3 分, 總體分數 (Overall rating) 3.8 分. 從這些分數來看, 比較有優勢的項目或許是原創性, 但是在文章品質以及技術完整度上可能是將來要多下功夫之處. 寫論文跟寫文章真的差很多, 真不曉得那些很會寫論文的人過去是受什麼樣的邏輯和技術寫作訓練啊...

隨文附上 reviewer No.3 跟 reviewer No.4 的意見, 提供 後進/產學同好 挑戰 ACM SIGCHI 系列之參考.

Comments from Reviewer No.3

This paper addresses interface design issues inside a physical space. The papers presents an innovative design process that allows the user to control an ambient space from a small suitcase. The project offers elegant solutions – suitcase, ambient pen, multiple screens - to physical elements of space that are often difficult to implement - wall, window, ceiling, screen. The paper is also remarkable in defining universal parameters for space– foreground and background, calm, context specific, customization – task space, communication space, and awareness space. The Ambient Mediated Environment project can be helpful to other spatial design research looking for ways to define interactions in space. I am left with a few questions and comments. Do you know examples or domains of application for personal design environments? Do you see any applications in office furniture design? What current trends or concepts for interior design could integrate this kind of project? The interface with architectural design needs also to be explored on many levels including lighting, sounds, textures, acoustic, temperature, air flow, smell.... See the experimentations of 19 th century Huysmans. Space is not all harmony, it is also the place for frictions, collisions and clashes. Although adding more complexity to the project may blur the lines of its existing clarity, it may make your project more real, more multi-dimensional by its acceptance of contradictions and conflicts.

Comments from Reviewer No.4

Main Contribution: Describes an augmented reality technology platform with some personalisation and local context awareness. Scenarios of use are described to illustrate the technology.

Comments to Authors: The paper is a limited technology description with no evaluation, with no evidence that user's want or can use the ambient room devices. Problems to be addressed (a) The description of how the technology works is poor. (b) The notifier, trigger is simple and involves not real monitoring just a simple timer. (c) The illustrative scenario shows potential usability problem, the actions of the ambient pen appear to be context dependent p 6- but there is no way for the user to predict effect of actions such as take out of put back into the suitcase. Why should information floating on the wall be visible or useful? How does it help reminding any better than MS task manager? (d) State event interpretation rules are not specified- how does the system know when to communicate sketches to Kitty- p6 end as apposed to set up a video link ? (e) The devices do not extend standard CSCW functionality, besides introducing tangible TUI style interaction that has not been evaluated. (f) The device TUI interaction is not clear- e.g. what are concaves – docking platforms? (g) No requirements analysis or user evaluations has been attempted so this looks like technology looking for users rather than serious attempt to improve interactive technology.


related links:
ACM SIGCHI
DIS 2006 (Designing Interactive Systems)
CHI 2006 (Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems)
UIST 2006 (User Interface Software and Technology)
DUX 2007 (Designing User eXperience)


4 Comments:

At 3/07/2006 10:43:00 上午, Anonymous 曾紅猴 said...

It's tooooooooooo deep.

 
At 3/07/2006 12:35:00 下午, Blogger 阿浪~ said...

哇~

對於你立志於投上這麼困難的PAPER感到萬分的崇敬。

 
At 3/07/2006 11:57:00 下午, Blogger TOTORO said...

大仔:

加油啦!敢於挑戰不凡,爭取榮耀的舉動,身為同學,均會同感爽快.

 
At 3/09/2006 04:46:00 下午, Blogger daniel said...

感謝各位大仔的鼓舞, 小弟會再接再勵, 不負諸位大仔的期望.

 

張貼留言

<< Home