Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2pzkn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T17:32:06.156Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

VR OR NOT? INVESTIGATING INTERFACE TYPE AND USER STRATEGIES FOR INTERACTIVE DESIGN SPACE EXPLORATION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2023

Ananya Nandy ,
James Smith ,
Nicholas Jennings ,
Mike Kuniavsky ,
Bjoern Hartmann  and
Kosa Goucher-Lambert
Ananya Nandy*
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley;
James Smith
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley;
Nicholas Jennings
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley;
Mike Kuniavsky
Affiliation:
Accenture Labs
Bjoern Hartmann
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley;
Kosa Goucher-Lambert
Affiliation:
University of California, Berkeley;
*
Nandy, Ananya, University of California, Berkeley United States of America, ananyan@berkeley.edu

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Computational design tools allow the generation of vast numbers of possible designs, entrusting the human designer with describing constraints or specifications to guide exploration of the design space. Designers can have many different decision considerations when conducting this type of exploration, including form, function, users, or context. In this work, we investigate strategies that emerge when people are tasked with exploring a large design space within either a non-immersive (2D) or immersive (VR) interface and equipped with action-based interactions to set or envision specifications related to their considerations. Results from a 28 participant user study uncovers that people have varying strategies to enact their decision considerations that are not unique to the type of interface. However, the interfaces differ in perceptions of enabling breadth or depth of exploration holistically, with preference towards 2D interfaces to compare options, and VR to understand single designs. These results have implications for the user experience of systems that allow designers to explore the outputs of large design spaces, both at the interaction and interface levels.

Keywords

Virtual realityHuman behaviour in designDesign methodsdesign space exploration
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 3: ICED23 , July 2023 , pp. 3851 - 3860
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Bang, H. and Selva, D. (2020), “Measuring human learning in design space exploration to assess effectiveness of knowledge discovery tools”, in: International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Vol. 83976, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, p. V008T08A017.Google Scholar
Chen, X., Tao, Y., Wang, G., Kang, R., Grossman, T., Coros, S. and Hudson, S.E. (2018), “Forte: User-driven generative design”, in: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erhan, H., Wang, I.Y. and Shireen, N. (2015), “Harnessing design space: A similarity-based exploration method for generative design”, International Journal of Architectural Computing, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 217–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heylighen, A. and Dong, A. (2019), “To empathise or not to empathise? empathy and its limits in design”, Design Studies, Vol. 65, pp. 107–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jennings, N., Nandy, A., Zhu, X., Wang, Y., Sui, F., Smith, J. and Hartmann, B. (2022), “Generativr: Spatial interactions in virtual reality to explore generative design spaces”, in: CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts, pp. 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keshavarzi, M., Bidgoli, A. and Kellner, H. (2020), “V-dream: Immersive exploration of generative design solution space”, in: International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Springer, pp. 477–494.Google Scholar
Kim, H. and Hyun, K.H. (2022), “Understanding design experience in virtual reality for interior design process”, in: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference of the Association for Computer- Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia (CAADRIA) 2022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lau, M., Hirose, M., Ohgawara, A., Mitani, J. and Igarashi, T. (2012), “Situated modeling: A shape-stamping interface with tangible primitives”, in: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction, pp. 275–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, B., Shin, J., Bae, H. and Saakes, D. (2018), “Interactive and situated guidelines to help users design a personal desk that fits their bodies”, in: Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference, pp. 637–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marks, J., Andalman, B., Beardsley, P.A., Freeman, W., Gibson, S., Hodgins, J., Kang, T., Mirtich, B., Pfister, H., Ruml, W. et al. (1997), “Design galleries: A general approach to setting parameters for computer graphics and animation”, in: Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques, pp. 389–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matejka, J., Glueck, M., Bradner, E., Hashemi, A., Grossman, T. and Fitzmaurice, G. (2018), “Dream lens: Exploration and visualization of large-scale generative design datasets”, in: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mohiuddin, A. and Woodbury, R. (2020), “Interactive parallel coordinates for parametric design space exploration”, in: Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, A., Wang, H., Grinspun, E., Solomon, J. and Matusik, W. (2018), “Interactive exploration of design tradeoffs”, ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shugrina, M., Shamir, A. and Matusik, W. (2015), “Fab forms: Customizable objects for fabrication with validity and geometry caching”, ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Urban, Anderson, J., Stroetzel, F., Grossman, M., Fitzmaurice, T., (, G. 2021), “Designing co-creative ai for virtual environments”, in: Creativity and Cognition, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
Wang, P., Zhang, S., Billinghurst, M., Bai, X., He, W., Wang, S., Sun, M. and Zhang, X. (2020), “A comprehensive survey of ar/mr-based co-design in manufacturing”, Engineering with Computers, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 1715— 1738.CrossRefGoogle Scholar