LuxAR: A Direct Manipulation Projected Display to Extend and Augment Desktop Computing

Yuan Chen, Géry Casiez, Daniel Vogel, Sylvain Malacria

Letter Of Changes:

Dear reviewers,

We sincerely appreciate your time to review our submission. Based on your feedback, we made revisions to address issues and incorporate suggestions. Below we provide responses to comments with a description of the resulting revisions. Revisions are marked with a → in this response and coloured red in the uploaded PDF.

# RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION

## Research contribution in crowded research space [AC, 4RaC]

We agree this is a crowded space, but we believe Table 1 will help readers understand how our work differs. A key differentiation is how our approach leverages the unique physical characteristics of an architect lamp and explores a new design space to extend a desktop computing onto physical surfaces through direct manipulation of a lamp.

→ In the Introduction, we rephrased a key sentence in the second last paragraph, clarified the design space is "new" in the contribution list, and added an overall statement at the end of the contribution list.

→ In section 3, we added two sentences after design goals to state what is unique about our contribution relative to related work.

→ We added a reference to PenLight in section 3.3.

## Augmenting one Region at a Time [4RaC]

This is a limitation shared with most single pro-cam systems (e.g. [7, 15, 42]). There are advantages, for example using a single pro-cam really simplifies cost and complexity compared to multiple calibrated projectors (e.g. [14]). And most relevant to our work, is how the act of repositioning a single pro-cam allows the user to explicitly choose where (and what) to display, enabling a more focused interaction without being exposed to other nearby information. But there are limitations when browsing information outside the display area and its effect on multi-task workflows.

→ We added more discussion about this at start of "Attached Interactions with Spatial Awareness" in section 7.1

# METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS [EJVS]

## Clarify Qualitative Analysis Methodology

→ We elaborated and updated Sec 6.3 to describe our analysis process for user comments.

## Design Implication Methodology

→ We updated the 1st para of Section 7.1 to better link our results with our design guidelines.

## Physical and mental demand scales

→ We now explain in section 6.2 that these are taken from the NASA TLX and why we only use two scales.

## Result Presentation

→ In section 6.4, we now separate design goals from result interpretations where the title summarized the results.

# MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS

## Reviewer [ejvs] provided additional general suggestions.

→ We now directly introduce the two variations of spotlight visualizations at the end of par 1 in section 3.1, then use the first sentence of par 2 and par 3 to make it clear that each is describing one of those variations.

→ We added a sentence to introduce the scenarios and Figure 8 is now referenced in each scenario.

→ We added direct references to design goals in the list following 1st para in Sec 3 and they are highlighted in bold text when relevant to the discussion in section 7.1.

Keywords: Augmented Reality, Desktop Computing, Interaction Techniques

Abstract:

We prototype and evaluate a desktop input and output device in the form of an architect desk lamp. The bulb is replaced with a pico laser projector, a button replaces the switch, and the mechanical design allows it to remain in position between user manipulations.
By also tracking lamp position and orientation, we explore novel interaction techniques to extend and augment conventional devices in a physical desktop environment. Content can be transferred from devices to the surrounding environment, and the representation of content can be adapted to surfaces, objects, and other devices using the lamp projection target and lamp proximity. A user study with the prototype and semi-structured interviews examine proposed interactions and consider potential scenarios and applications. Based on the results, we propose further design considerations for direct manipulation systems to extend and augment desktop computing.

Submission Number: 40