SlideShare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy.
SlideShare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details.
Successfully reported this slideshow.
Activate your 14 day free trial to unlock unlimited reading.
Assessment of Semantic Taxonomies for Blind Indoor Navigation Based on a Shopping Center Use Case
Assessment of Semantic Taxonomies for Blind Indoor Navigation Based on a Shopping Center Use Case
1.
J. Eduardo Pérez a b, Myriam Arrue b, Masatomo Kobayashi a,
Hironobu Takagi a & Chieko Asakawa a
a. IBM Research – Tokyo
b. EGOKITUZ: Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs
University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)
Assessment of Semantic Taxonomies
for Blind Indoor Navigation
Based on a Shopping Center Use Case
:
www.jeduardoperez.info
:
@j_eduardoperez
:
juaneduardo.perez@ehu.eus
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs
April 4th 2017, Perth (Australia)
Session 6: Evaluating and Measuring Accessibility
The 14th Web for All Conference (W4A 2017)
Research
–
Tokyo
a. IBM Research – Tokyo
b. EGOKITUZ: Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs
University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)
2.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
MotivationLaboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
§ Many
loca9on-‐based
services
(LBS)
available
thanks
to
the
ubiquity
of
smartphones
§ LBS
provide
personalized
assistance,
in
any
loca9on
and
for
a
huge
variety
of
applica9ons
(e.g.,
provide
visually
impaired
with
turn-‐by-‐turn
naviga8on
support
through
unknown
environments
by
using
vocal
instruc8ons
based
on
accurate
localiza8on)
-‐
§ Despite
this,
we
know
liIle
about
WHAT
environmental
elements
and
features
are
more
useful
to
improve
naviga<onal
assistance
for
people
with
visual
impairments.
Tac9le
paving
Tac9le
cues
to
support
naviga9on
of
visually
impaired
Braille
buIons
2
/
16
3.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
① Survey
real
world
seman9c
taxonomies
to
characterize
indoor
environments
② Create
a
set
of
environmental
informa<on
for
a
shopping
center
③ Perform
an
indoor
naviga<on
experiment
with
visually
impaired
par9cipants,
in
order
to
evaluate
(by
mean
of
subjec9ve
assessments)
the
usefulness
of
naviga9on
assistance
>
a
smartphone-‐based
naviga8onal
assistant
–NavCog,
including
vocal
instruc8ons
enriched
with
environmental
informa8on
was
used
by
par8cipants
during
experiments
<
Motivation
§ Many
loca9on-‐based
services
(LBS)
available
thanks
to
the
ubiquity
of
smartphones
§ LBS
provide
personalized
assistance,
in
any
loca9on
and
for
a
huge
variety
of
applica9ons
(e.g.,
provide
visually
impaired
with
turn-‐by-‐turn
naviga8on
support
through
unknown
environments
by
using
vocal
instruc8ons
based
on
accurate
localiza8on)
§ Despite
this,
we
know
liIle
about
WHAT
environmental
elements
and
features
are
more
useful
to
improve
naviga<onal
assistance
for
people
with
visual
impairments.
3
/
16
4.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
Ø Few
specifica9ons
despite
the
many
loca9on-‐based
services
available
Ø Very
limited
concerning
indoor
environments
(working
draY
or
proposals)
Wayfindr
[2]
-‐ Non-‐profit
organiza9on
from
UK
-‐ 1st
working
draY
of
an
open
standard
for
audio-‐based
wayfinding
assistance
-‐ Purpose:
assist
naviga9on
of
people
with
visual
impairments
within
built-‐environments
by
means
of
audio
instruc9on
OpenStreetMap
[1]
-‐ popular
collabora9ve
community
-‐ Aims
at
a
free
&
editable
map
of
the
world
(no
specific
applica9on
or
popula9on
targeted,
but
considers
a11y
issues)
-‐ Mainly
for
outdoors
areas
-‐ Surveyed
latest
proposals
for
indoor
environments
Japanese
MLITT
[3]
-‐ Working
draY
about
data
specifica9on
for
modeling
outdoor
pedestrian
spaces
-‐ Purpose:
several
applica9ons
(including
naviga9on
assistance
services
for
different
groups
of
people
who
encounter
barriers)
Surveyed works
[1]
OpenStreetMap:
wiki.openstreetmap.org
[2]
Wayfindr:
www.wayfindr.net/wp-‐content/uploads/2016/07/Wayfindr-‐
Open-‐Standard-‐Working-‐DraY-‐1.0.pdf
[3]
Japanese
MLITT:
www.mlit.go.jp/common/000124059.pdf
4
/
16
5.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
OpenStreetMap
Wayfindr
Japanese
MLITT
Pathways
§ type
of
pathway
§ width
§ access
restric<ons
§ tac<le
paving
availability
§ slope
(wheelchair
access)
§ type
of
pathway
§ length
§ tac<le
paving
availability
§ junc9ons,
significant
curve,
type
of
tac9le
paving
§ type
of
pathway
§ width,
length
§ access
restric<ons
§ tac<le
paving
availability
§ slope
(gradient,
wheelchair
access)
§ surface
condi9on,
direc9on
of
travel,
open
hours,
name
Doorways
§ type
of
doorway
§ width
§ wheelchair
accessible
§ steps
counts
§ entrance
name
§ handle
type,
opening
direc9on,
ramp,
handrail,
access
restric9ons,
level
§ type
of
doorway
§ venues
connected
§ opening
buIon
(door
side
and
height)
§ type
of
doorway
§ width
§ step
height
(only
one)
§ entrance
name
Elevators
§ tac<le/braille
support
§ levels
connected
§ wheelchair
accessible
§ access
restric9ons,
opening
hours
§ audible
announcements
§ tac<le/braille
support
§ levels
connected
§ call
buIons
loca9on
(side
and
height)
side
doors
open
(if
more
than
1
door)
-‐
defined
as
type
of
pathway
§ audible
announcements
§ braille
support
§ wheelchair
accessible
Escalators
§ direc<on
of
travel
§ tac<le
paving
availability
§ width,
incline,
lanes,
access
restric9ons
§ direc<on
of
travel
(may
change
-‐
peak
hours)
§ tac<le
paving
availability
§ handrail
loca9on,
side
to
stand
during
travel
-‐
defined
as
type
of
pathway
§ direc<on
of
travel
(pathway
feature)
§ tac<le
paving
availability
Stairs
§ number
of
steps
§ handrail
loca<on
§ levels
connected
§ tac<le
paving
availability
§ width,
incline,
ramp
(for
wheelchair),
name
§ number
of
steps
§ handrail
loca<on
§ levels
connected
§ tac<le
paving
availability
§ type
of
stairs,
landing/flight
of
stairs
-‐
defined
as
type
of
pathway
§ number
of
steps
§ handrail
loca<on
§ tac<le
paving
availability
§ assis9ve
mechanism
available
Public
toilets
§ wheelchair
accessible
§ gender
§ opening
hours
§ access
restric9ons,
diaper
changing
table,
drinking
water,
hand
washing,
paper
supply
NOT
INCLUDED
§ accessibility
level
(wheelchair
accessible
and
colostomy
support)
§ gender
§ opening
hours
§ crib
Rooms/
venues
§ name
§ purpose
§ level
§ name
§ purpose NOT
INCLUDED
Building/
facili8es
§ name
§ address
§ purpose,
levels,
entrance,
access
restric9ons
NOT
INCLUDED
§ name
§ address
§ phone
number,
opening
hours,
toilets
accessibility
level
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
Survey
> environmental information for indoor areas
5
/
16
6.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
Features
Examples
of
vocal
messages
Pathways
§ type
of
pathway
[corridor/elevator]
§ length,
width
§ tac9le
paving
availability
Locate
tac9le
paving
“proceed
9
meters
on
Braille
blocks,
and
turn
right”
Doorways
§ type
of
doorway
“Coredo
Muromachi
2
underground
level
main
entrance…
to
access
there
are
2
automa6c
doors”
Elevators
§ outside
&
inside
buIons
loca9on
(door
side
&
height)
§ buIons
with
Braille
support
Travel
by
elevator
“elevator
is
on
your
leP;
go
down
to
the
1st
floor”
“aPer
geTng
off
the
elevator
turn
right”
Find
elevator
buIons
(outside
&
inside)
“call
bu7on
with
Braille
is
right
side
of
the
elevator
door”
“Go
to
the
1st
floor;
control
bu7ons
with
Braille
are
right
side
of
the
exit”
Venues
(stores)
§ name
§ doorway
entrance
Recognize
nearby
stores
“Coffee
Rin
is
on
your
leP”
Obstacles
§ heading
§ angle
Predict
nearby
obstacles
“proceed
20
meters,
there
are
obstacles
in
both
sides…”
Elements
and
features
included
based
on:
-‐ Needs
of
people
with
visual
impairments
-‐ Environmental
informa9on
present
in
the
shopping
center
along
experimental
routes
Shopping Center Use Case
> Set of environmental information
6
/
16
7.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Shopping Center Use Case
> Network route editor
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
For
each
floor
of
the
shopping
center:
① Define
fixed
posi<ons
for
the
different
environmental
elements
(pathways,
doorways,
elevators,
stores
&
obstacles)
② Include
seman<c
informa<on
for
each
element
7
/
16
8.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
Features
Examples
Pathways
§ type
of
pathway
[corridor/elevator]
§ length,
width
§ tac9le
paving
availability
>
Locate
tac9le
paving
“proceed
9
meters
on
Braille
blocks,
and
turn
right”
Doorways
§ type
of
doorway
“…
to
access
there
are
2
automa6c
doors”
Elevators
§ outside
&
inside
buIons
loca9on
(door
side
&
height)
§ buIons
with
Braille
support
>
Travel
by
elevator
“elevator
is
on
your
leP;
go
down
to
the
1st
floor”
“aPer
geTng
off
the
elevator
turn
right”
>
Find
elevator
buIons
(outside
&
inside)
“call
bu7on
with
Braille
is
right
side
of
the
elevator
door”
“Go
to
the
1st
floor;
control
bu7ons
with
Braille
are
right
side
of
the
exit”
Venues
(stores)
§ name
§ doorway
entrance
>
Recognize
nearby
stores
“Coffee
Rin
is
on
your
leP”
Obstacles
§ heading
§ angle
>
Predict
nearby
obstacles
“proceed
20
meters,
there
are
obstacles
in
both
sides…”
Shopping Center Use Case
> Vocal instructions to assist navigation
8
/
16
9.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
Large-‐scale
shopping
center:
-‐ 3
adjacent
towers
-‐ 14
floors
in
total
(basement
to
4th
floor)
-‐ 98
stores
(restaurants,
fashion
stores,
cinemas,…)
-‐ Elevators
with
Braille
support
Basement
floor
connects
the
shopping
center
with
a
metro
sta<on
access
by
an
indoor
open
area
between
the
3
towers
including
tac9le
paving
support
Experiment
> Shopping center outline
9
/
16
10.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Experiment
> Navigational tasks
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
3rd
route
Metro
sta9on
access
Cinema
9cket
counters
Food
store
BASEMENT
3
FLOOR
1
FLOOR
183
meters
Naviga9on
through
the
shopping
center
was
divided
into
3
different
routes:
-‐ total
distance
of
429
meters
-‐ Routes
included
representa9ve
indoor
areas
(indoor
open
space,
entrance,
corridors
with
different
widths,
junc9ons’
complexity
and
number
of
obstacles,
tac9le
paving
support)
-‐ each
route
included
travel
between
floor
by
elevator
1st
route
2nd
route
10
/
16
11.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs
• 9
subjects
with
visual
impairments:
-‐ Visual
condi9on:
(5)
totally
blind
(4)
residual
vision
-‐ Mobility
aid:
(8)
white
cane
(1)
guide
dog
-‐ Smartphone
exp.:
(5)
Yes
(4)
No
-‐ Voice
nav.
app
exp.:
(3)
Yes
(6)
No
• 5
categories
to
rate
usefulness
of
vocal
messages
(7
points
Likert
scale):
① Locate
tac9le
paving
② find
elevator
buIons
③ travel
by
elevator
④ predict
nearby
obstacles
⑤ recognize
nearby
stores
Experiment
> Participants & subjective ratings
Research
–Tokyo
11
/
16
12.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs
Results
> all participants Research
–Tokyo
-‐ Overall,
posi9ve
assessments
about
the
usefulness
of
the
different
vocal
messages
used
(7-‐strongly
posi9ve
to
1-‐strongly
nega9ve)
§ 71.1%
posi9ve
/
13.3%
neutral
/
15.6%
nega9ve
-‐ Preferred
messages:
“elevator
naviga<on”
closely
followed
by
“elevator
buUons”
-‐ Less
preferred
messages:
“obstacles”
-‐ High
standard
devia9on
(SD)
values:
§ Opposing
opinions
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
tac9le
paving
elevator
buIons
elevator
naviga9on
obstacles
stores
All
par<cipants
(N=9)
M
5.22
5.67
5.89
4.33
5.33
SD
1.99
1.41
1.27
1.94
1.87
12
/
16
13.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
Results
grouped by > mobility aid & visual condition
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
tac9le
paving
elevator
buIons
elevator
naviga9on
obstacles
stores
White
cane
users
(N=8)
M
5.75
5.5
5.75
4.75
5.13
SD
1.28
1.41
1.28
1.58
1.89
Totally
blind
(N=4)
M
6
5.25
5.5
4.75
5.25
SD
1.41
0.96
1.29
1.26
1.5
Residual
vision
(N=4)
M
5.5
5.75
6
4.75
5
SD
1.29
1.89
1.41
2.06
2.45
Guide
dog
user
(N=1)
1
7
7
1
7
-‐ White
cane
users:
§ Preferred
messages:
“elevator
naviga<on”
and
“tac<le
paving”
§ Less
preferred
messages:
“obstacles”
-‐ Similar
ra<ngs
among
white
cane
users
who
were
totally
blind
and
with
residual
vision
for
the
different
vocal
messages
-‐ Guide
dog
user:
§ Lowest
ra9ngs
for
messages
about
“tac<le
paving”
and
“obstacles”
(unnecessary
and
confusing
for
her)
[opposing
to
the
average
assessments]
§ Highest
scores
for
the
different
messages
about
elevators
and
those
announcing
stores
13
/
16
14.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs Research
–Tokyo
Results
grouped by > experience with technology
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
tac9le
paving
elevator
buIons
elevator
naviga9on
obstacles
stores
EXPERIENCE
with
SMARTPHONES
(N=4)
M
6
6.5
6.75
4.75
5.5
SD
1.41
0.58
0.5
2.06
2.38
NO
experience
with
SMARTPHONES
(N=4)
M
5.5
4.5
4.75
4.75
4.75
SD
1.29
1.29
0.96
1.26
1.5
EXPERIENCE
with
VOICE
NAVIGATION
APPS
(N=3)
M
6.67
5.67
6
4
4.67
SD
0.58
0.58
1
1.73
2.31
NO
experience
with
VOICE
NAVIGATION
APPS
(N=5)
M
5.2
5.4
5.6
5.2
5.4
SD
1.3
1.82
1.52
1.48
1.82
-‐ On
average
experienced
par9cipants
with
smartphones
and
voice
naviga9on
apps
gave
higher
ra<ngs
than
par9cipants
without
previous
exp.:
§ Specially
no9ceable
for
messages
about
“elevator
naviga<on”,
“elevator
buUons”
and
“tac<le
paving”
(up
to
2
points
more)
–
and
lower
SD
values
-‐ On
the
contrary
this
fact
was
less
no9ceable
for
messages
about
“obstacles”
and
“stores”:
§ Difficulty
to
define
a
fixed
posi9on
of
some
obstacles
(e.g.
chairs)
resulted
in
localiza9on
issues
§ Reduced
informa9on
about
stores
(name)
-‐ Lower
ra<ngs
by
inexperienced
par9cipants
with
experimental
technologies
may
be
due
to:
§ Issues
caused
by
inexperience
use
technologies,
or
certain
reluctance
to
use
new
technologies
§ Inaccurate
localiza9on
by
naviga9on
system
[also
affect
assessments
of
other
par9cipants]
14
/
16
15.
W4A 2017Assessment of semantic taxonomies for blind indoor navigation based on a shopping center use case
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs
Conclusions Research
–Tokyo
ü Overall
posi9ve
assessment
of
vocal
messages
show
a
high
level
of
acceptance
for
audio-‐based
naviga9on
assistance
ü Environmental
informa9on
presented
was
some9mes
unnecessary
(obstacles
and
tac8le
paving
for
guide
dog
user),
too
brief
(some
par8cipants
suggested
more
detailed
informa8on
than
only
store
names),
or
inaccurate
(localiza8on
issues
with
not
fixed
obstacles)
ü Other
technical
approaches
should
be
studied
to
achieve
effec9ve
usage
during
naviga9on
guidance
(e.g.,
image
recogni8on
for
accurate
obstacles
predic8on)
Future
work
q Analyze
par9cipants’
behaviors
during
naviga9onal
tasks
(system
logs
and
video
recordings)
15
/
16
16.
Thank you for your attention
Questions?
Assessment of Semantic Taxonomies
for Blind Indoor Navigation
Based on a Shopping Center Use Case
:
www.jeduardoperez.info
:
@j_eduardoperez
:
juaneduardo.perez@ehu.eus
Laboratory of HCI for Special Needs
April 4th 2017, Perth (Australia)
Session 6: Evaluating and Measuring Accessibility
The 14th Web for All Conference (W4A 2017)
Research
–
Tokyo