Slashdot Mirror


Finger-Tracking Tech Turns Your Arm Into A Touchpad (gizmag.com)

New submitter Keys of Cars quotes a report from Gizmag: Smartwatches may be handy, but their tiny touchscreens can easily be obscured by your fingers as you're using them on the device. As a result, we've seen various attempts to move the control surface. One of the latest, Carnegie Mellon University's SkinTrack system, moves it onto your hand and lower arm. The strap of the smartwatch features multiple electrodes, which detects a ring that is worn on your "control finger" (on your non smartwatch-wearing arm) that emits a high-frequency electrical signal. When your finger, specifically the ring, approaches and/or touches the arm with the watch, the high-frequency electrical signal is propagated through the skin. It will work even if your skin is covered with clothing! The system is reportedly 99% accurate, and can locate touches with a mean error of 7.6mm. SkinTrack was used to control games, scroll through lists, zoom in and out of maps, draw pictures, and operate an onscreen number pad.

28 comments

  1. Hmm by liqu1d · · Score: 1

    Considering apples watch screen is 38x42mm 7.6mm mean accuracy seems pretty ineffective.

    1. Re:Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But your arm is much bigger than this

    2. Re:Hmm by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      I'm a flid, you insensitive clod!!!!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. So... by suupaabaka · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...just my arm? ;D

    1. Re:So... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 3, Funny

      Why? Looking into making micro-transactions?

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

    2. Re:So... by Nidi62 · · Score: 2

      ...just my arm? ;D

      Adds a new meaning to the term "joystick"

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  3. accuracy by arth1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The system is reportedly 99% accurate, and can locate touches with a mean error of 7.6mm

    That seems pretty horrible, to be honest.
    Your big toe probably has better accuracy than that.

    1. Re:accuracy by dinfinity · · Score: 2

      Depends on the size of the surface. Have you watched the video?

      Much more problematic are the amount of input lag and the lack of a cursor (besides when hovering, which I imagine to be very tiresome).
      Concerning the latter: Making your arm a giant touchpad is awesome, but we generally don't use normal touchpads without cursors (for good reasons) and it seems silly to disregard that.

    2. Re:accuracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is this insightful? Even elementary school children learn that most parts of the body cannot locate touch even to within a centimeter (10mm)

    3. Re:accuracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that what he told you? I'm so sorry. When was the first time you were molested?

    4. Re:accuracy by Dashiva+Dan · · Score: 1

      Depends on the size of the surface. Have you watched the video?

      Much more problematic are the amount of input lag and the lack of a cursor (besides when hovering, which I imagine to be very tiresome). Concerning the latter: Making your arm a giant touchpad is awesome, but we generally don't use normal touchpads without cursors (for good reasons) and it seems silly to disregard that.

      Cursors?
      None of my touchpads have cursors, only my touchscreens, and I usually can't see them on touchscreens cause my fingers aren't transparent for some reason.
      However I have to agree, the lag apparent in the video is atrocious. It's a lot worse than I expected.

      --
      "lt;dr" is the correct response to most of my posts.
    5. Re:accuracy by dinfinity · · Score: 1
    6. Re:accuracy by Dashiva+Dan · · Score: 1

      Oh, so you mean the literal dot on the screen showing where the finger was, that switched between blue and green on touch and hover? Then yeah, I saw it had that. So I'm still confused by your original post...

      --
      "lt;dr" is the correct response to most of my posts.
    7. Re:accuracy by dinfinity · · Score: 1

      Watch the video again. Almost all sample applications worked by swiping, etc. The only time they show a cursor when not hovering is in the beginning, when explaining the technology.

      I'm not saying a cursor is required for all modes of interaction, but unless the gestures are broad and simple, including a cursor is a good idea. Not requiring the user to hover whilst positioning is also a good idea.

      Also, I think you forgot to say: "Hey man, thanks for the link explaining what cursors are. My understanding of the word was clearly lacking and in hindsight my slight snarkiness in response to your comment was unwarranted, for which I apologize. I'll try to do a basic web search before I comment, the next time."

    8. Re:accuracy by Dashiva+Dan · · Score: 1

      Watch the video again. Almost all sample applications worked by swiping, etc. The only time they show a cursor when not hovering is in the beginning, when explaining the technology.

      I'm not saying a cursor is required for all modes of interaction, but unless the gestures are broad and simple, including a cursor is a good idea. Not requiring the user to hover whilst positioning is also a good idea.

      Also, I think you forgot to say: "Hey man, thanks for the link explaining what cursors are. My understanding of the word was clearly lacking and in hindsight my slight snarkiness in response to your comment was unwarranted, for which I apologize. I'll try to do a basic web search before I comment, the next time."

      Actually, as you just confirmed, they do have cursor support demonstrated in the video, which is why I wrote my smartarse reply to begin with.

      So, hey man, thanks for confirming my assertion that it does have cursor support, that correlates with most interface-development standards such as wiki, W3C, etc, specify.

      (Not sure why I'm being a little bit nasty on this thread, nothing to do with you I swear, just workplace frustrations working themselves out I assume)

      --
      "lt;dr" is the correct response to most of my posts.
  4. Wrong link. by Fwipp · · Score: 1

    The first link in the summary links to a different technique, called "Finger I/O", which uses sonar and is from the University of Washington. The link next to the headline ( http://www.gizmag.com/skintrac... ) properly goes to the thing that the article is about; which is electric & from CMU.

  5. No Ring by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    I figure the future will use hand gestures recognized by 3D triangulation + image recognition. You'll hold your hand over your screen and manipulate objects as if conducting an orchestra.

    Or Google-Glass-like viewing instead of a hand-held screen.

    A guy who was jailed in the 70's and released recently was taken back by people "talking to themselves" while walking down the street. Soon they'll also be conducting invisible orchestras.

    Unless direct brain inserts mature faster.

    1. Re:No Ring by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Taken aback. Unless you mean that they had time travel or re-imprisoned him.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  6. So basically... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a lamer, less accurate power glove?

  7. Too much stuff by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

    So, now not only need to keep track of and charge a phone and a watch, but also jave to remember to charge a ring as well?

  8. No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Smartwatches may be handy

    No.

    1. Re:No. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Doesn't it depend on whether they're digital or analog?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  9. Air guitar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is all.

  10. Did they find a use for smartwatches too? by Torp · · Score: 1

    Unless you love being spammed by notifications, I don't see any use for them.
    They'd better work on making smartwatches useful for something first, and then fix the control scheme.

    --
    I apologize for the lack of a signature.
  11. When will I be able to buy a cheap touch overlay? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    I give a shit about being able to detect touch on my arm, I can do that already, it's called nerves. What I want is to be able to detect touches on my 25.5" displays. I have two of them and I'd really love to convert them both to touch. If I could even find an overlay that size, it would cost minimum $200, and that's for just two point touch. Why are touch overlays so expensive, even IR ones? When will they get cheaper?

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  12. Tech-tard Crazy Is the New Normal by JustBoo · · Score: 0

    So, we enter an age where behavior of tech-tards and stone-cold crazy people will be pretty much indistinguishable from each other. People haphazardly walking along talking to themselves and spastically tapping their arms and hands like they are trying to "get the bugs off man! get the goddam bugs off! gaah!" is here. Cool.

    San Francisco is going to be a hoot.

    1. Re:Tech-tard Crazy Is the New Normal by neminem · · Score: 1

      We've already been living in that era for at least a decade - I've definitely had *multiple* instances where I couldn't tell if the crazy guy on the subway was mumbling to himself, or mumbling into a bluetooth headset. I suppose this does make it even less obvious though.

  13. Testudo by Hognoxious · · Score: 2

    Strap a Wacom tablet to your arm. As a bonus, you can use it as a shield.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."