Download Full Text

R EFERENCES
increases as small as 50% in target size will increase accuracy
from 40% to 60%.
Fig. 10.
[1] Ferrol R. Blackmon, Michael Weeks, “Wireless Tilt Mouse: Providing
Mouse-type Access for Computer Users with Spinal Cord Injuries or
Disabilities,” 1st International Conference on Pervasive Technologies
Related to Assistive Environments (PETRA08), International Workshop
on Ambient Assistive Technologies for Intelligent Healthcare Services
(AASTIH08), Athens, Greece, ACM International Conference Proceedings Series, July, 2008.
[2] Adriane B. Randolph,“Individual-Technology Fit: Matching Individual
Characteristics and Features of Biometric Interface Technologies with
Performance,” Georgia State University, 2007, Doctoral Dissertation.
[3] Julien Kronegg, Svyatoslav Voloshynovskiy, Thierry Pun, “BrainComputer Interface Model: Upper-capacity bound,” Signal-to-noise Ratio
Estimation, and Optimal Number of Symbols, Tech. Rep. 04.03, Computer
Vision and Multimedia Laboratory, Computing Centre, University of
Geneva, Rue Général Dufour, 24, CH-1211, Geneva, Switzerland, 2004.
[4] Grupo
de
Robotica,HeadMouse
2,University
of
Lleida,http://robotica.udl.es/headmouse/headmouse2
/headmouse2e.html,accessed February, 2009.
[5] Richard Seven,UW Creates a Computer Mouse Driven by Sound,The
Seattle Times,http://seattletimes.nwsource.com, October, 2008.
[6] Takeo Igarashi, John F. Hughes, Voice as Sound: Using Non-verbal Voice
Input for Interactive Control,Proceedings of 14th annual ACM symposium
on User Interface Software and Technology, 2001,155-156.
[7] Adam J. Sporka,Sri H. Kurniawan, Pavel Slavik, Acoustic Control of
Mouse Pointer, Information Society, 2006, vol. 4, num. 3, pp.125-131.
[8] Emotiv
Systems,Emotiv
EPOC
Neuroheadset,http://emotiv.com/corporate/2 0/2 1.htm,January, 2009.
[9] Jupiterimages Corporation, Clipart.com,Jupiterimages Corporation,
http://www.clipart.com, 2008.
[10] A7 Engineering. EmbeddedBlue 500 User Manual, Revision E, April 6,
2005.
[11] ABLEDATA Classification System Website, National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research of the U.S. Dept. of Education,
http://www.abledata.com, 2006, accessed February, 2008.
[12] BASIC Stamp Syntax and Reference Manual, version 2.2, Parallax, Inc.,
2005.
[13] L. Citi, R. Poli, C. Cinel, F. Sepulveda,“P300-Based BCI Mouse With
Genetically-Optimized Analogue Control,” IEEE Transactions on Neural
Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, vol. 16, no. 1, pages 51-61,
February, 2008.
[14] D-Link Corporation. DBT-120 Wireless Bluetooth 2.0 USB Adapter
http://www.dlink.com/products/?pid=34, accessed February, 2008.
[15] I. S. MacKenzie, A. Sellen, W. Buxton, “A Comparison of Input Devices
in Elemental Pointing and Dragging Tasks,” Proceedings of the SIGCHI
conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 161-166, 1991.
[16] Memsic 2125 Accelerometer Demo Kit (#28017), Parallax Inc., 2004.
[17] T. Surdilovic, Fuzzy Mouse Cursor Control System For Computer Users
with Spinal Cord Injuries, Masters Thesis, Georgia State University, 2005,
pages 32-68.
[18] J. E. Zucco, B. H. Thomas, K. Grimmer, “Evaluation of Three Wearable
Computer Pointing Devices for Selection Tasks,” Proceedings of the 2005
ninth IEEE International Symposium on Wearable Computers (ISWC-05),
pages 178-185, October 18-21, 2005.
Estimated effect of increasing target size
These results show that the head tilt mouse is feasible
as an assistive interface to provide mouse control to users
with disabilities or as simply a hands-free alternative to the
traditional mouse. The results also establish a baseline of
performance to be improved upon, where one of the goals
of this research is to see how closely we can reach the
performance of traditional pointing devices while keeping costs
low.
VI. C ONCLUSION
The wireless head tilt mouse provides computer mouse
control for people with severe disabilities who cannot use a
traditional mouse or a hands-free alternative to other users
at a low cost without the need for specialized hardware. The
system operates by having the user wear a cap embedded with
the device. Head motion is sensed and transmitted over the
Bluetooth wireless protocol to the user’s computer. There, the
signals are mapped to mouse cursor movement. An experiment
were carried out comparing the head tilt mouse performance
of acquiring and clicking random targets to a Bluetooth optical
mouse and a laptop touchpad mouse and the results were
analyzed and presented. We found that people were able to
navigate to the targets in an average of 10.9 seconds with a
accuracy of 40-50%. We also estimated that by increasing the
target size from a radius of 20 to 30 pixels, would possibly
increase the accuracy from 40 to 60%. We believe that these
results show that the device is a feasible option to users
with disabilities or as simply a hands-free alternative to the
traditional mouse. This research is on-going, and we expect to
make future enhancements with size and usability.
44