skip to main content
10.1145/1502650.1502670acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiuiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Detecting and correcting user activity switches: algorithms and interfaces

Published:08 February 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

The TaskTracer system allows knowledge workers to define a set of activities that characterize their desktop work. It then associates with each user-defined activity the set of resources that the user accesses when performing that activity. In order to correctly associate resources with activities and provide useful activity-related services to the user, the system needs to know the current activity of the user at all times. It is often convenient for the user to explicitly declare which activity he/she is working on. But frequently the user forgets to do this. TaskTracer applies machine learning methods to detect undeclared activity switches and predict the correct activity of the user. This paper presents TaskPredictor2, a complete redesign of the activity predictor in TaskTracer and its notification user interface. TaskPredictor2 applies a novel online learning algorithm that is able to incorporate a richer set of features than our previous predictors. We prove an error bound for the algorithm and present experimental results that show improved accuracy and a 180-fold speedup on real user data. The user interface supports negotiated interruption and makes it easy for the user to correct both the predicted time of the task switch and the predicted activity.

References

  1. X. Bao, J. Herlocker, and T. G. Dietterich. Fewer clicks and less frustration: Reducing the cost of reaching the right folder. In Proc. of IUI-06, pages 178--185, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. V. Bellotti, N. Ducheneaut, M. Howard, and I. Smith. Taking email to task: the design and evaluation of a task management centered email tool. In CHI-03, pages 345--352, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. C.-C. Chang and C.-J. Lin. LIBSVM: a library for support vector machines, 2001. Software available at http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cjlin/libsvm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. K. Crammer, O. Dekel, J. Keshet, S. Shalev-Shwartz, and Y. Singer. Online passive-aggressive algorithms. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 7:551--585, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. M. Czerwinski, E. Horvitz, and S. Wilhite. A diary study of task switching and interruptions. In Proc. of CHI'04, pages 175--182, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. A. N. Dragunov, T. G. Dietterich, K. Johnsrude, M. McLaughlin, L. Li, and J. L. Herlocker. Tasktracer: A desktop environment to support multi-tasking knowledge workers. In Proc. of IUI-05, pages 75--82, 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. W. Geyer, M. Muller, M. Moore, E. Wilcox, L.-T. Cheng, B. Brownholtz, C. Hill, and D. R. Millen. Activityexplorer: Activity-centric collaboration from research to product. IBM Systems Journal - Special Issue on Business Collaboration, 45(4):713--738, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. J. Gluck, A. Bunt, and J. McGrenere. Matching attentional draw with utility in interruption. In Proc. of CHI-07, pages 41--50, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. T. Joachims. Learning to Classify Text Using Support Vector Machines. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. V. Kaptelinin. UMEA: translating interaction histories into project contexts. In SIGCHI, pages 353--360, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. D. Quan and D. Karger. Haystack: Metadata-enabled information management. In UIST-2003., 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. F. Rosenblatt. The Perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain. Neurocomputing: foundations of research, pages 89--114, 1988. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J. Shen,L. Li,and T. G. Dietterich. Real-time detection of task switches of desktop users. In Proc. of IJCAI-07, pages 2868--2873, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. J. Shen, L. Li, T. G. Dietterich, and J. Herlocker. A hybrid learning system for recognizing user tasks from desktop activities and email messages. In Proc. of IUI-06, pages 86--92, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. G. Smith, P. Baudisch, G. Robertson, M. Czerwinski, B. Meyers, D. Robbins, and D. Andrews. Groupbar: The taskbar evolved. In Proc. of OZCHI 2003, pages 34--43, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Detecting and correcting user activity switches: algorithms and interfaces

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          IUI '09: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Intelligent user interfaces
          February 2009
          522 pages
          ISBN:9781605581682
          DOI:10.1145/1502650

          Copyright © 2009 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 8 February 2009

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate746of2,811submissions,27%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader