Improving video rating performance – focusing on User & Interface Geoffrey Yu, ARRB Group Ltd Interaction Design Associati...
Welcome and who are we? <ul><li>Geoffrey Yu  –  Consultant , Safe Systems, QLD/NT branch </li></ul><ul><li>ARRB Group Limi...
Overview <ul><li>Context – project domain </li></ul><ul><li>Task – project work </li></ul><ul><li>User – what is video rat...
Context: road safety <ul><li>Global issues </li></ul><ul><li>About  1.3 million  people are killed on  world's roads  each...
Task – road assessment <ul><li>Various methods of assessing  road parameters : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Pre => use design pla...
Hawkeye 2000 Network Survey Vehicle
User – video rating <ul><li>Use a  video viewer  to examine/observe road parameters: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hawkeye Process...
Interface – Excel (Original)
Interface – Excel Input form Lookup tables
Design – Excel <ul><li>Target user  and expected usage: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Low computer-level skills </li></ul></ul><ul...
Primary issues – Excel <ul><li>Usability </li></ul><ul><ul><li>data input errors (input raw calculation values using looku...
Scope for improvement – Raven <ul><li>A more efficient and reliable solution was needed due to the  increased  market dema...
Design – Raven System process……Brainstorm issues/solutions……System architecture Etc……
System – Raven Video Server Rater Rater Results
Interface – Raven <ul><li>Main screen </li></ul>
Interface – Raven <ul><li>Rating form – midblocks </li></ul>
Key features – Raven <ul><li>Usability </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Familiar standard, business (neutral) looking interface </li>...
Effects of using Raven over Excel <ul><li>User performance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduced typos and other user input issues...
Learnings & future enhancements <ul><li>Currently Raven has been used to assess the majority of QLD state and local (regio...
Other ideas? <ul><li>Integration of other data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>GIS (Shapefiles, Google maps, etc.) </li></ul></ul><u...
Road ends here? Thank you and safe driving!
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Improving video rating performance – focusing on user & interface

599

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
599
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Improving video rating performance – focusing on user & interface

  1. 1. Improving video rating performance – focusing on User & Interface Geoffrey Yu, ARRB Group Ltd Interaction Design Association (IxDA) Brisbane 21 st June 2011
  2. 2. Welcome and who are we? <ul><li>Geoffrey Yu – Consultant , Safe Systems, QLD/NT branch </li></ul><ul><li>ARRB Group Limited </li></ul><ul><li>Note: Formerly known as Australian Road Research Board </li></ul><ul><li>Not Assassination Records Review Board (see Wikipedia.org ) </li></ul>Function provide research, consulting and information services to the road and transport industry Expertise road safety , asset management, pavement /structural analysis, car parking, data collection, etc. Clients government/ road authorities (local, state, federal, overseas), int’l aid agencies (World Bank), transport (logistics, mining), etc.
  3. 3. Overview <ul><li>Context – project domain </li></ul><ul><li>Task – project work </li></ul><ul><li>User – what is video rating </li></ul><ul><li>Interface: Excel – overview of original system </li></ul><ul><li>Interface: Raven – overview of new system </li></ul><ul><li>Findings – learnings from new system </li></ul><ul><li>Ideas? – future thoughts! </li></ul>
  4. 4. Context: road safety <ul><li>Global issues </li></ul><ul><li>About 1.3 million people are killed on world's roads each year </li></ul><ul><li>Expected to increase to 1.9 million by 2020 </li></ul><ul><li>90% occur in developing countries </li></ul><ul><li>Source: www.decadeofaction.org , UN’s Decade of Action 2011-2020 </li></ul><ul><li>Local issues </li></ul><ul><li>Last 10 years about 17,000 people killed on Australian roads </li></ul><ul><li>Additionally about 220,000 were hospitalised (serious injuries) </li></ul><ul><li>Average: 5 deaths and 60 serious injury cases everyday </li></ul><ul><li>Source: www.ausrap.org , Australian Road Assessment Program </li></ul>
  5. 5. Task – road assessment <ul><li>Various methods of assessing road parameters : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Pre => use design plans, analyse historical data </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>In-situ => onsite inspections and observations </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Post => data collection of site, process back in office </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Modern data collection equipment allows for efficient and safer assessment of roadways (and is repeatable !) </li></ul><ul><li>Typical data collected: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Multi camera (4-5) setup with high resolution (>1080p) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Geotagged video (~10 cm accuracy) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Other equipment (optional/advanced): </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Pavement laser scan (road profiling – rutting and roughness) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Environment laser scan (object detection using 3D point cloud) </li></ul></ul>
  6. 6. Hawkeye 2000 Network Survey Vehicle
  7. 7. User – video rating <ul><li>Use a video viewer to examine/observe road parameters: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Hawkeye Processing Toolkit (ARRB) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DVR Viewer (QDTMR) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>AssetLoc (RTA NSW) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Or any geotagged video/images </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Parameters are assessed according to project scope : </li></ul>Crack Trees Poles Asset Safety
  8. 8. Interface – Excel (Original)
  9. 9. Interface – Excel Input form Lookup tables
  10. 10. Design – Excel <ul><li>Target user and expected usage: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Low computer-level skills </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Limited resources (e.g. time) to conduct a risk assessment </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Small number of sites or “hot spots” would be conducted </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Utilised as a field tool (in-situ inspection) at each site </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Market and project changes after initial development: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Road authorities saw benefits in assessing their major roadways </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Risk assessments increased in popularity = increased demand </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>More assessments = more data input = more data processing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>New expectations to integrating (e.g. GIS) and presenting results </li></ul></ul>
  11. 11. Primary issues – Excel <ul><li>Usability </li></ul><ul><ul><li>data input errors (input raw calculation values using lookups!) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>i.e. high utilisation of user memory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>lack of task scope (what roads to rate, completion status) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>i.e. poor communication of system status and task </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Result => User overwhelmed! => Quality & Quantity reduced </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data management </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Multiple raters = multiple spreadsheets (manual sync of data!) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>i.e. high levels of data manipulation and handling </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Data must be manually validated (e.g. typos not auto checked!) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>i.e. data can easily be corrupted (e.g. 1.8 and 18, difference?) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Result => Data is double-handled! => Efficiency reduced </li></ul></ul>
  12. 12. Scope for improvement – Raven <ul><li>A more efficient and reliable solution was needed due to the increased market demand for risk assessments </li></ul><ul><li>Business case was put forward, with internal project approved </li></ul><ul><li>Total of 4 months (part-time load) for delivery given </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Initial design – 1 month </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Coding and development – 2 month </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Beta testing – 1 month </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Solution was to tackle the primary issues , trying to solve the most problems with minimal effort / least cost (80:20 rule?) </li></ul><ul><li>Designed for in-office tool assessing roads at 100 m intervals </li></ul>
  13. 13. Design – Raven System process……Brainstorm issues/solutions……System architecture Etc……
  14. 14. System – Raven Video Server Rater Rater Results
  15. 15. Interface – Raven <ul><li>Main screen </li></ul>
  16. 16. Interface – Raven <ul><li>Rating form – midblocks </li></ul>
  17. 17. Key features – Raven <ul><li>Usability </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Familiar standard, business (neutral) looking interface </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>User task-oriented layout of UI elements </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Inclusion of status bar and completion status </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Number of perceived rating forms reduced (5 to 2 types) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Input options are explicit and predefined (no lookup tables!) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Data management </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Data validation is implicit by providing predefined options </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Centralisation of multiple rating sources </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Duplicated rating work is reduced (1 rater per road section) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rating task is verified against a (predefined) rating list (scope) </li></ul></ul>
  18. 18. Effects of using Raven over Excel <ul><li>User performance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduced typos and other user input issues => increase quality </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduced feeling of being overwhelmed (i.e. memory and layout) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>More confident in performing (repetitive) task (system trust) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>More confident in task delivery => increase task visibility </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased user satisfaction (don’t want to use Excel anymore!) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Project performance </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Increased rating output 2x (consistently better than Excel) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduced data issues (i.e. user errors, duplication and corruption) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Project manager has better control and awareness of task </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduced overheads/resource waste => increases profit margin! </li></ul></ul>
  19. 19. Learnings & future enhancements <ul><li>Currently Raven has been used to assess the majority of QLD state and local (regional significance) roads => ~100,000 km !! </li></ul><ul><li>Small changes focusing on user task and process issues can positively affect user performance and project outcomes </li></ul><ul><li>Raven was a prototype / proof of concept </li></ul><ul><ul><li>can rating performance be improved (primary issues)? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Raven has minor bugs => minimal affect on usability and project outcomes (for now!!) </li></ul><ul><li>Other features/improvements that were not implemented: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Mass data editor (table/spreadsheet to fix data issues) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Highlight (colour) rating issues (increase user communication) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Help / reference system (rating guide / issues) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reporting engine (risk charts, risk maps, etc.) </li></ul></ul>
  20. 20. Other ideas? <ul><li>Integration of other data </li></ul><ul><ul><li>GIS (Shapefiles, Google maps, etc.) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Traffic data (crash, volume, etc.) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Template rating form => flexible for other assessments </li></ul><ul><li>Highlight image regions for assessment (rating assistance) </li></ul><ul><li>Automatic video/image detection (machine vision) </li></ul>
  21. 21. Road ends here? Thank you and safe driving!

×