Closely coupled collaboration for search tasks Jean Simard Mehdi Ammi Malika Auvray CNRS-LIMSI, University of Paris-Sud XI, France
[email protected]
Context Since the emergence of the molecular modeling research field, biologists often work together on molecular design with asynchronous methods [Casher and Rzepa, 1995, Ghadersohi et al., 2005]. We propose a synchronous and colocated Collaborative Virtual Environments (CVE) in order to interact with molecular environment [Chastine et al., 2005].
Objective We propose to study the role of CVE for the improvement of closely coupled collaboration tasks in interactive molecular environments. This research highlights working strategies according the type and the context of the task. Moreover, it shows some constraints and conflicting actions that may occur in CVE.
Tasks Participants must search 10 residues (group of atoms on Figure 2) in a molecule as fast as they can. 2 molecules with different sizes were proposed to deform [Bowman, 1999]. The task must be realized alone and in pair.
Experimental design R • VMD (visualization), NAMD (simulation), IMD (connect visualization with simulation), VRPN (tools connection), OpenHaptics . R • 3 PHANToM Omni SensAble (3 DoF) connected to 3 computers through VRPN.
Figure 1: Schema of the experimental platform.
– 1 grab tool: to change the point-of-view (shared tool). – 2 tug tool: to deformed the molecule (private tool). • Participants have a shared view on a large screen display (see Figure 1). Residue 3 and 8
Complexity of the task
Residue 2 and 7
• Position: Represent the position of the residue: on the periphery (Extern) of the molecule or in the middle (Intern) • Shape: Correspond to the geometrical structure, the pattern is easy to find or not • Color: Correspond to the colors of involved atoms (depends on the rareness of atom) • Similar residues: Presence (or not) of similar residues
Residue 1
Residue 6
Table 1: Involved factors in the complexity of molecules (Carbon, Oxygen, Nitrogen and Sulfur) Residues
Position Shape
Color
Similar residues
Intern
Circle
8 C, 1 N
No
2
Intern
Star
1 C, 3 N
No
3
Intern
Circle
6 C, 1 O
No
4
Extern
Chain
4C
No
5
Extern
Chain
4 C, 1 N
No
6
Intern
Chain
2 C, 2 S
No
7
Extern
Star
1 C, 3 N
No
8
Extern
Circle
6 C, 1 O
No
9
Intern
Chain
4C
Yes
10
Intern
Chain
4 C, 1 N
Yes
Prion
TRP-Cage
1
Residue 4 and 9
Figure 2: Repartition of residues on TRP-Cage and Prion molecules.
Improvement of efficiency 200
Alone
Working strategies
distance (cm)
time (s)
120 80 40 1
2
3
4
5 6 Residues
Conclusion
20
In group
160
0
7
8
Residue 5 and 10
9
10
Figure 3: Mean execution time depending on the residue. Execution time • Significant difference between molecules: TRP-Cage is too simple but Prion is considered as a complex task • Pairs more efficient than single participants: contribution of the second participant during the visual search of residue • Residues 6 and 9 shows significant differences: these residues are intern in the molecule
This study highlights the role of collaboration to improve the fulfilment of complex tasks. Pairs show better efficiency than alone participants. We also show that different working strategies are used depending on the pairs. Audio recordings show pairs’ limits about communication and coordination.
16 12 8 4 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 8 Pairs
9
10 11 12 13 14
Figure 4: Average distances between workspaces (for residues 6 and 9). Distance between working spaces Same region The distance is on a scale of a residue (the virtual distance is < 10Å). Experimental observations indicates this strategy introduce kind of gestural guidance. This strategy implies a lot of verbal communication for the coordination to avoid conflict actions. Neighbouring region The distance is on a scale of 2 or 3 residues (the " # virtual distance is ⊂ 10Å, 20Å ). This strategy allows a better control of deformation process through a complementary manipulation. Distant region Participants manipulate structures with low coupling (the virtual distance is > 20Å). This strategy implies a low coupling between participants without direct interactions and coordination of actions.
The subjective evaluation (from a questionnaire) highlights some difficulties for the understanding of low amplitude movements of partners. This awareness limit is due to the physical absence of the partner from the virtual environment. In fact, the visual representation of the body plays an important role for the understanding of associated actions and gestures.
Perspectives Our perspective is to study the evolution of collaborative working strategies according more importants participants number (until 4 participants). To solve problems of communication and coordination, we will propose haptic metaphors and haptic tools to enhance the awareness of each participant in the CVE.
Acknowledgments R Sonia DAHDOUH, Maxime DELORME, Adrien GIRARD, Russel H. TAYLOR, Mei LU, SensAble
References Bowman, D. A. (1999). Interaction techniques for common tasks in immersive virtual environments: design, evaluation, and application. PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA. Casher, O. and Rzepa, H. S. (1995). A chemical collaboratory using explorer eyechem and the common client interface. SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, 29(2):52–54. Chastine, J. W., Brooks, J. C., Zhu, Y., Owen, G. S., Harrison, R. W., and Weber, I. T. (2005). AMMP-Vis: a collaborative virtual environment for molecular modeling. In Proceedings of the ACM symposium on Virtual reality software and technology, pages 8–15, New York, NY, USA. ACM. Ghadersohi, A., Pape, D. E., Weeks, C. M., Green, M. L., and Miller, R. (2005). Collaborative scientific visualization and real-time monitoring of protein structure data. In 18th Annual CSE Graduate Conference, pages 231–240.
