skip to main content
10.1145/2702123.2702398acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

GEM-NI: A System for Creating and Managing Alternatives In Generative Design

Published:18 April 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

We present GEM-NI -- a graph-based generative-design tool that supports parallel exploration of alternative designs. Producing alternatives is a key feature of creative work, yet it is not strongly supported in most extant tools. GEM-NI enables various forms of exploration with alternatives such as parallel editing, recalling history, branching, merging, comparing, and Cartesian products of and for alternatives. Further, GEM-NI provides a modal graphical user interface and a design gallery, which both allow designers to control and manage their design exploration. We conducted an exploratory user study followed by in-depth one-on-one interviews with moderately and highly skills participants and obtained positive feedback for the system features, showing that GEM-NI supports creative design work well.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

pn1419-file3.m4v

m4v

83.5 MB

p1201.mp4

mp4

191.8 MB

References

  1. Akin, Ö. How do architects design? Artificial Intelligence and Pattern Recognition in Computer Aided Design, (1978), 65--103.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Akin, Ö. Variants in design cognition. Design knowing and learning: Cognition in design education, (2001), 105--124.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Bohnacker, H. Generative Design: Visualize, Program, and Create with Processing. Princeton Architectural Press, New York, 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Bueno, C., Crossland, S., Lutteroth, C., and Weber, G. Rewriting History: More Power to Creative People. OzCHI 2011, 62--71. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Buxton, B. Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design. Morgan & Kaufmann, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Chen, H.-T., Wei, L.-Y., and Chang, C.-F. Nonlinear revision control for images. ACM SIGGRAPH 2011 papers, ACM (2011), 105:1--105:10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Cherry, E. and Latulipe, C. Quantifying the Creativity Support of Digital Tools Through the Creativity Support Index. TOCHI 2014 21, 4 (2014), 21:1--21:25. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Chevalier, F., Dragicevic, P., Bezerianos, A., and Fekete, J.-D. Using text animated transitions to support navigation in document histories. CHI 2010, ACM (2010), 683--692. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Dow, S., Fortuna, J., Schwartz, D., Altringer, B., et al. Prototyping Dynamics: Sharing Multiple Designs Improves Exploration, Group Rapport, and Results. SIGCHI' 11, ACM (2011), 2807--2816. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Drucker, S.M., Petschnigg, G., and Agrawala, M. Comparing and managing multiple versions of slide presentations. UIST 2006, ACM (2006), 47--56. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Edwards, W.K., Igarashi, T., LaMarca, A., and Mynatt, E.D. A temporal model for multi-level undo and redo. UIST 2000, ACM (2000), 31--40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Green, T.R. Cognitive dimensions of notations. People and Computers V, (1989), 443--460. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Grossman, T., Matejka, J., et al. Chronicle: capture, exploration, and playback of document workflow histories. UIST 2010, ACM (2010), 143--152. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Hartmann, B., Follmer, S., Ricciardi, A., Cardenas, T., and Klemmer, S.R. d.note: revising user interfaces through change tracking, annotations, and alternatives. CHI 2010, ACM (2010), 493--502. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Hartmann, B., Yu, L., Allison, A., Yang, Y., and Klemmer, S.R. Design as exploration: creating interface alternatives through parallel authoring and runtime tuning. UIST 2008, ACM (2008), 91--100. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Heer, J., Mackinlay, J., Stolte, C., and Agrawala, M. Graphical histories for visualization: supporting analysis, communication, and evaluation. TVCG 14, 6 (2008), 1189--1196. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Hsu, W. and Woon, I.M.Y. Current research in the conceptual design of mechanical products. ComputerAided Design 30, 5 (1998), 377--389.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Jankun-Kelly, T.J. and Ma, K.-L. A spreadsheet interface for visualization exploration. Visualization '00, IEEE Computer Society Press (2000), 69--76. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Klemmer, S.R., Thomsen, M., Phelps-Goodman, E., Lee, R., and Landay, J.A. Where do web sites come from?: Capturing and interacting with design history. CHI 2002, ACM (2002), 1--8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Kurlander, D. and Feiner, S. A visual language for browsing, undoing, and redoing graphical interface commands. In Visual Languages and Visual Programming, 1990, 257--275.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Lunzer, A. and Hornbæk, K. Subjunctive Interfaces: Extending Applications to Support Parallel Setup, Viewing and Control of Alternative Scenarios. ACM TOCHI 14, 4 (2008), 17:1--17:44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Ma, K.-L. Image graphs - a novel approach to visual data exploration. Visualization '99, (1999), 81--88. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Marks, J., et al. Design galleries: a general approach to setting parameters for computer graphics and animation. SIGGRAPH '97, ACM (1997), 389--400. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Menezes, A. and Lawson, B. How designers perceive sketches. Design Studies 27, 5 (2006), 571--585.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Newman, M.W. and Landay, J.A. Sitemaps, Storyboards, and Specifications: A Sketch of Web Site Design Practice. DIS 2000, ACM (2000), 263--274. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Sheikholeslami, M. You can get more than you make. 2011. http://summit.sfu.ca/item/9649.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Shneiderman, B. The eyes have it: a task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. Visual Languages 1996, IEEE (1996), 336--343. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Simon, H.A. The sciences of the artificial. MIT press, 1996. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Smedt, T.D., Lechat, L., and Daelemans, W. Generative Art Inspired by Nature, Using NodeBox. In Applications of Evolutionary Computation. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, 264--272. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Smith, B.N., Xu, A., and Bailey, B.P. Improving interaction models for generating and managing alternative ideas during early design work. Graphics Interface 2010, (2010), 121--128. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Stephan, M. and Cordy, J.R. A survey of model comparison approaches and applications. Conference on Model-Driven Engineering and Software Development, (2013), 265--277.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Su, S.L. Visualizing, editing, and inferring structure in 2D graphics. Adjunct UIST 2007, ACM (2007), 29--32.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Su, S.L., Paris, S., Aliaga, F., Scull, C., Johnson, S., and Durand, F. Interactive Visual Histories for Vector Graphics. MIT, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Terry, M. and Mynatt, E.D. Recognizing creative needs in user interface design. Creativity and Cognition 2002, ACM (2002), 38--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Terry, M., Mynatt, E.D., Nakakoji, K., and Yamamoto, Y. Variation in element and action: supporting simultaneous development of alternative solutions. CHI 2004, ACM (2004), 711--718. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Wang, L., Shen, W., Xie, H., Neelamkavil, J., and Pardasani, A. Collaborative conceptual design-state of the art and future trends. Computer-Aided Design 34, 13 (2002), 981--996.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Woodbury, R. Elements of Parametric Design. Routledge, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Woodbury, R.F. and Burrow, A.L. Whither design space? Artif. Intell. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. 20, 2 (2006), 63--82. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Xu, K., Zhang, H., Cohen-Or, D., and Chen, B. Fit and diverse: set evolution for inspiring 3D shape galleries. ACM TOG, 31, 4, (2012), 57:1--57:10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. GEM-NI: A System for Creating and Managing Alternatives In Generative Design

      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
        CHI '15: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
        April 2015
        4290 pages
        ISBN:9781450331456
        DOI:10.1145/2702123

        Copyright © 2015 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 the author(s) 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: 18 April 2015

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        CHI '15 Paper Acceptance Rate486of2,120submissions,23%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader