WO2000035091A1 - Dispositifs a frappe a simple toucher dont le fonctionnement est fonde sur des codes ambigus, et procedes de conception de tels dispositifs - Google Patents

Dispositifs a frappe a simple toucher dont le fonctionnement est fonde sur des codes ambigus, et procedes de conception de tels dispositifs Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2000035091A1
WO2000035091A1 PCT/US1999/029343 US9929343W WO0035091A1 WO 2000035091 A1 WO2000035091 A1 WO 2000035091A1 US 9929343 W US9929343 W US 9929343W WO 0035091 A1 WO0035091 A1 WO 0035091A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
code
typable
symbols
ambiguous
keys
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/US1999/029343
Other languages
English (en)
Inventor
Howard Andrew Gutowitz
Original Assignee
Eatoni Ergonomics, Inc.
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Eatoni Ergonomics, Inc. filed Critical Eatoni Ergonomics, Inc.
Priority to US11/796,720 priority Critical patent/USRE43082E1/en
Priority to EP99964211A priority patent/EP1145434A4/fr
Priority to AU20499/00A priority patent/AU760655B2/en
Priority to US09/856,863 priority patent/US6885317B1/en
Priority to BR9916073-0A priority patent/BR9916073A/pt
Priority to CA002353862A priority patent/CA2353862C/fr
Priority to JP2000587443A priority patent/JP2002532792A/ja
Priority to EA200100629A priority patent/EA004128B1/ru
Publication of WO2000035091A1 publication Critical patent/WO2000035091A1/fr
Priority to HK02102894.1A priority patent/HK1041121B/zh

Links

Classifications

    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F3/00—Input arrangements for transferring data to be processed into a form capable of being handled by the computer; Output arrangements for transferring data from processing unit to output unit, e.g. interface arrangements
    • G06F3/01—Input arrangements or combined input and output arrangements for interaction between user and computer
    • G06F3/02—Input arrangements using manually operated switches, e.g. using keyboards or dials
    • G06F3/023—Arrangements for converting discrete items of information into a coded form, e.g. arrangements for interpreting keyboard generated codes as alphanumeric codes, operand codes or instruction codes
    • G06F3/0233—Character input methods
    • G06F3/0237—Character input methods using prediction or retrieval techniques
    • B—PERFORMING OPERATIONS; TRANSPORTING
    • B41—PRINTING; LINING MACHINES; TYPEWRITERS; STAMPS
    • B41J—TYPEWRITERS; SELECTIVE PRINTING MECHANISMS, i.e. MECHANISMS PRINTING OTHERWISE THAN FROM A FORME; CORRECTION OF TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS
    • B41J5/00—Devices or arrangements for controlling character selection
    • B41J5/08—Character or syllable selected by means of keys or keyboards of the typewriter type
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
    • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
    • G06F3/00—Input arrangements for transferring data to be processed into a form capable of being handled by the computer; Output arrangements for transferring data from processing unit to output unit, e.g. interface arrangements
    • G06F3/01—Input arrangements or combined input and output arrangements for interaction between user and computer
    • G06F3/02—Input arrangements using manually operated switches, e.g. using keyboards or dials
    • G06F3/023—Arrangements for converting discrete items of information into a coded form, e.g. arrangements for interpreting keyboard generated codes as alphanumeric codes, operand codes or instruction codes
    • G—PHYSICS
    • G09—EDUCATION; CRYPTOGRAPHY; DISPLAY; ADVERTISING; SEALS
    • G09G—ARRANGEMENTS OR CIRCUITS FOR CONTROL OF INDICATING DEVICES USING STATIC MEANS TO PRESENT VARIABLE INFORMATION
    • G09G5/00—Control arrangements or circuits for visual indicators common to cathode-ray tube indicators and other visual indicators
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H03—ELECTRONIC CIRCUITRY
    • H03K—PULSE TECHNIQUE
    • H03K17/00—Electronic switching or gating, i.e. not by contact-making and –breaking
    • H03K17/94—Electronic switching or gating, i.e. not by contact-making and –breaking characterised by the way in which the control signals are generated
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H03—ELECTRONIC CIRCUITRY
    • H03M—CODING; DECODING; CODE CONVERSION IN GENERAL
    • H03M11/00—Coding in connection with keyboards or like devices, i.e. coding of the position of operated keys
    • H03M11/02—Details
    • H03M11/04—Coding of multifunction keys
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H03—ELECTRONIC CIRCUITRY
    • H03M—CODING; DECODING; CODE CONVERSION IN GENERAL
    • H03M11/00—Coding in connection with keyboards or like devices, i.e. coding of the position of operated keys
    • H03M11/22—Static coding
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04M—TELEPHONIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04M11/00—Telephonic communication systems specially adapted for combination with other electrical systems

Definitions

  • This invention relates to the design of touch- typable devices, and the use of touch-typable devices in computing and telecommunications, and more particularly to touch-typable devices based on strongly touch-typable ambiguous codes and substantially optimal ambiguous codes .
  • the instant invention relates to touch-typable devices.
  • Touch typing like playing a musical instrument, is a manual skill which is difficult to learn. Once learned, it is difficult to modify the acquired motor patterns. This difficulty places strong constraints on keyboard design.
  • the familiar Qwerty keyboard (and its close variants such as the Azerty keyboard used in France) owes its dominance to ingraining and overlearning of the motor patterns involved in touch typing.
  • the wide established base of the Qwerty keyboard has created a barrier to entry to improved keyboards, such as the Dvorak keyboard. Indeed such keyboards have gathered but a limited user community. Due to its large number of keys, the Qwerty keyboard is unsuitable for handheld and smaller typable devices. The advent of such devices opens a niche for keyboard designers.
  • chording methods in which a combination of input means are activated to encode each symbol
  • ambiguous codes in which a combination of symbols are encoded by each input means.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide keyboards suitable for touch typing on both full-sized and miniature keyboards .
  • a further object of this invention is to enable sending alphanumeric messages from ordinary phones or two-way pagers to other such devices, without human intervention, and thus inexpensively.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide touch-typable personal digital assistants.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide keyboards which are typable by the driver of a vehicle without unnecessarily distracting the driver.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide for typable communication devices which are inexpensive to manufacture and work with standard telephone communication systems.
  • a further object of some of the preferred embodiments of this invention is to facilitate the transfer of typing skills of touch typists trained on conventional keyboards to novel keyboards through partial conservation of the layout of the conventional keyboard in the layout of the novel keyboard.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide general methods to produce ambiguous codes which have a substantially minimal lookup error rate.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide general methods to produce ambiguous codes which have a substantially minimal query rate.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide a device to reduce typing injuries.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide a handheld computing device which is twice foldable.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide a one-handed keypad suitable for implementation on a handheld computer.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide a one- and two-handed keypad suitable for implementation on a hand-held computer or a desktop keypad.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide keyboards which are Qwerty-like.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide easily learnable chording keyboards.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide synergistic hybrids of chording and ambiguous keyboards.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide a touch-typing-oriented querying mechanism for typable devices embodying ambiguous codes .
  • a further object of this invention is to provide a touch-typing-oriented disambiguation mode for typable devices embodying ambiguous codes .
  • a further object of this invention is to provide a hybrid chording/ambiguous code keyboard fully compatible with the standard telephone keyboard.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide ergonomic assignments of symbols to modes.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide a substantially transparent touch-typable interface for typable devices comprising touch screens.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide optimization across a set of natural languages.
  • a further object of this invention is to provide a device typable using the one hand holding the device, with reduced scanning time.
  • Figure 1 shows an overview of the optimization considerations for producing a typable device according to the present invention.
  • Figure 2 shows a flowchart for the construction of devices based on strongly touch typable ambiguous codes .
  • Figure 3 shows a flowchart for the construction of ambiguous codes satisfying at least one ergonomic criterion, and optimized with respect to these ergonomic criteria.
  • Figure 4 shows a flow chart of particular embodiment of the method of Figure 3 using a random search optimization method.
  • Figure 5 shows the distribution of lookup error probability for randomly chosen ambiguous codes on several selected keys.
  • Figure 6 shows the distribution of query probability for randomly chosen ambiguous codes on several selected number of keys .
  • Figure 7 shows a flow chart for directed random walk optimization.
  • Figure 8 shows a flow chart of the construction of strongly touch-typable ambiguous codes.
  • Figure 9 plots lookup error rate vs. number of keys for randomly chosen, and substantially optimized ambiguous codes .
  • Figure 10 plots query rate vs. number of keys for randomly chosen, and substantially optimized ambiguous codes .
  • Figure 11 shows lookup error rate vs. query rate for some substantially optimized ambiguous codes on a range of number of keys .
  • Figure 12 shows a table relating levels of strong touch typability to the number of keys required to achieve that level, for several different optimization methods .
  • Figure 13 shows a flow chart of the method for synthesizing encoding symbols.
  • Figure 15 shows a smart-card embodiment with 16 keys devoted to encoding of letter symbols.
  • Figure 16 shows a smart-card embodiment with 9 keys devoted to encoding of letter symbols.
  • Figure 17 shows a keyboard embedded in a steering wheel .
  • Figure 18 shows a telephone with a substantially optimal code on 10 keys.
  • Figure 19 shows an example reduced-ambiguity alphabetically ordered ambiguous code in application to a portable telephone .
  • Figure 20 shows a Qwerty-like keyboard, optimized with respect to lookup error rate and query rate, while respecting the ordering of letters on each row of the Qwerty keyboard.
  • Figure 21 shows an alternate Qwerty-like keyboard.
  • Figure 22 shows an ambiguous keyboard embodied in a standard numeric keypad layout .
  • Figure 23 shows an ergonomic touch-typing-oriented disambiguation mechanism.
  • Figure 24 shows a flow chart for a method to allow queries to be answered in a touch-typing oriented manner.
  • Figure 25 shows a one-handed embodiment of a keyboard designed for conservation of typing skills between one-handed and two-handed keyboards.
  • Figure 26 shows a two-handed embodiment of a keyboard designed for conservation of typing skills between one-handed and two-handed keyboards.
  • the two-handed keyboard is weighted for maximum similarity in typing motions between the two keyboards.
  • Figure 27 shows a two-handed embodiment of a keyboard designed for conservation of typing skills between one-handed and two-handed keyboards.
  • the two-handed keyboard is evenly weighted between the two hands .
  • Figure 28 shows an integrated mouse/keyboard.
  • Figure 29 shows a top view of a twice-foldable information appliance in the unfolded state.
  • Figure 30 shows a bottom view of a twice-foldable information appliance in the unfolded state.
  • Figure 31 shows a twice-foldable information appliance in the once-folded state, revealing an additional functionality.
  • Figure 32 shows a twice-foldable information appliance in the twice-folded state, revealing yet another functionality.
  • Figure 33 shows a twice-foldable information appliance in a detached state, allowing two-handed typing.
  • Figure 34 shows a typical personal digital assistant with a touch screen.
  • Figure 35 shows a typical personal digital assistant with a potentially transparent keyboard.
  • Figures 36A, B and C show three modes for a 16-key keyboard.
  • Figure 37 shows a standard telephone layout.
  • Figure 38 shows a hybrid chording/ambiguous code keyboard embodied in a telephone.
  • Figure 39 shows the distribution of lookup error rates and query rates for all hybrid chording/ambiguous codes of a specified structure, compared to the lookup and query rate of the standard ambiguous code.
  • Figure 40 shows a flow chart for the creation of multi-level strongly touch-typable ambiguous codes.
  • Figure 41 shows a flowchart for the creation of a specific embodiment of a multi-level strongly touchable ambiguous code .
  • Figure 42 shows a typable device suitable for implementation of the multi-level ambiguous code of figure 41.
  • Figure 43 shows the device of figure 42, operating to display the first level of a multi-level ambiguous code .
  • Figure 44 shows the second-level code of a multilevel ambiguous code .
  • Figure 45 shows the device of figure 42 operating to display part of the second level code of a multi-level ambiguous code .
  • Figure 46 shows the sequence of operating states of the device of figure 42 while used in combination with a multi-level ambiguous code to type the word "think”.
  • Figure 47 like figure 46 shows the operating states of the device of figure 42 while used in combination with a multi-level ambiguous code to type the word "think". In this case, however, the operation of a visual cache to reduce scan time is show as well.
  • a keyboard is a component of a communications and/or computing device which transforms physical movement by an operator into symbol sequences.
  • Keyboards comprise at least one input means which is responsible for the transformation of some subset of the physical motions operative to activate the keyboard into some subset of symbol sequences .
  • the physical movement used to operate a keyboard is typically in the form of motion of fingers and/or thumb or of a hand-held stylus. This definition extends to other bodily motions, such as head, tongue, or eye motions which might serve to signal a choice of symbol from the keyboard.
  • a device comprising a keyboard according to this definition will be referred to as a typable device .
  • typable device we understand not just the physical device containing the keyboard, but the entire communication system in which this typable device is embedded, the limits of that system defined by dependence on the underlying ambiguous coding scheme .
  • the limits of the system are clear and defined by the physical perimeters of the device.
  • the central computer In more general cases, in which for example the typable device includes a telephone handset sending information to a central computer, the central computer begin responsible for decoding or otherwise acting on the textual information communicated from the handset, then the "typable device” must be understood to include the central computer, as configured to operate in the required manner by software built in view of the teachings of this invention.
  • each of the at least one input means comprised in a keyboard can take a wide variety of physical manifestations.
  • the essential feature of an input means is that it permits an operator to select a subset from the set of symbols to be encoded by the keyboard.
  • Typing is the process of sequentially selecting at least one input means in order to select sequences of subsets of symbols from the set of symbols which can be encoded by the keyboard. It is to be appreciated that well-known handwriting recognition software permits a kind of typing in which the input means translates a collection of drawing motions into the selection of a subset of a set of symbols.
  • Touch typing is the process by which the symbol sequences are generated from the keyboard using only or predominately kinesthetic rather than visual or auditory feedback.
  • Reference Statistics The reference statistics on symbols sequences used to measure the correlation between symbols are typically estimated by analysis of a reference corpus.
  • a reference corpus is a large collection of text chosen to represent some aspect of language.
  • the choice of a corpus of English language texts is an arbitrary choice. The same analysis could be performed for any other written natural language .
  • the keys on a telephone keypad are often labelled with letters as well as numbers, typically with the key corresponding to the number 2 also corresponding to the letters a, b, and c, the key corresponding to the number 3 also corresponding to the letters d, e, and f, and so on in the standard ordering of letters in English.
  • sequence of key presses associated to the digit sequence 233 also corresponds to the letter sequences add, bee, and bed, all of which are English words, as well as various meaningless letter sequences such as cff .
  • a sequence is considered to have meaning if it appears in a reference list of meaningful sequences.
  • all of these letter sequences, meaningful or not, are associated with the same digit sequence.
  • the sequence of key presses 233 is an encoding and the sequences add, bee bed, eff and so on are decodings of the encoding 233. When no confusion will arise, "decodings" may be used to mean “meaningful decodings” .
  • decoding symbols The set of symbols used in decodings, in this example, letters in the alphabet, will be referred to as decoding symbols, or simply symbols if no confusion will arise, and the set of symbols used in encodings, in this example, digits, will be referred to as encoding symbols.
  • Ambiguous codes as such are well known in the art . On the standard telephone keypad used in the United States, there are 12 keys, 10 of which encode a digit, and several of these, typically 8, encode in addition 3 or 4 letters of the alphabet, arranged in alphabetic order. These assignments produce an ambiguous code which we will call the standard ambiguous code. This code is abc def ghi jkl mno pqrs tuv wxyz .
  • a weakly touch-typable device is a device in which the assignment of symbols to keys is essentially fixed; only relative to such a device can a typist develop physical reflexes for encoding particular symbols using particular motor patterns.
  • a typable device is strongly touch typable if it is 1) weakly touch typable, 2) based on an ambiguous code, and yet 3) such that in a normal mode of operation, a touch typist can use the typable device to produce text at an acceptable level of accuracy without being unduly distracted from the touch typing task to intervene in the disambiguation process.
  • Strong touch typability is a matter of degree; it is a measure of touch typability which depends on a host of factors, some pertaining to the individual typists, some pertaining to the uses to which the typable device will be typically put, and some pertaining to the structure of the typable device itself. For a given touch typists, for instance, a given typable device may be sufficiently strongly touch typable for some typing tasks, but not for others . It is to be appreciated that two of the key elements of the definition of strong touch typability, accuracy of the text produced and the distraction of the touch-typing user, depend on a number of factors, including: • the disambiguation means,
  • the means by which the attention of the user is drawn to the disambiguation mechanism for instance, a voice-synthesis mechanism which speaks the words or words in a query to the user may or may not be more distracting than a bell or a flashing light.
  • strong touch typability like temperature
  • the strong touch typability of a typable device can be quantitatively measured, with respect to any user or group of users, once these various factors are fixed, using standard experimental protocols, well- known to those skilled in the art.
  • two components of strong touch typability can be measured directly from an ambiguous code : lookup error and query error.
  • numerical values of strong touch typability can be assigned without any direct reference to a population of users, but only with reference to the ambiguous code in question.
  • a strongly touch typable ambiguous code is an ambiguous code on which strongly touch typable devices may be based.
  • Feedback Devices In devices which permit the user to intervene at various points in the decoding of symbol sequences generated using ambiguous codes, some manner of sensory feedback to the user is required. Typically, this feedback will be in the form of a graphical representation of symbols, however, feedback could take many forms, such as auditory, tactile, or even olfactory.
  • Ergonomic Factors Design of keyboards implementing ambiguous codes involves satisfying many constraints. These may include reduction of lookup error rate, reduction of query rate, selection of a number of keys consistent with the size of the desired keyboard, compatibility with existing keyboards such as the Qwerty keyboard, phone keypad, or numeric keypad, regularity of partition structure, anatomic fidelity, minimal mode- changing key use, partition structure, compatibility between one- and two-handed typing, and conservation of conventions such as alphabetic ordering. Other constraints include: the ergonomics of disambiguation mechanisms, the ergonomics of the encoding of weakly correlated symbols, look-and-feel, and availability of computing resources at the sending and receiving ends of a communication system utilizing ambiguous codes.
  • Lookup Error measures the error committed by a disambiguation mechanism which disambiguates by systematically selecting the most-probable (meaningful) decoding from the set of possible decodings of an ambiguous sequence.
  • the lookup error rate of a code is the sum, over all possible decodings which are not the most probable decoding of an ambiguous sequence, of the reference probability of the possible decodings. In the case of word-based disambiguation, these sequences begin and end with a "space" symbol, that is, are words.
  • Lookup error is the probability that the most-likely decoding is not the correct one.
  • the lookup error is conveniently expressed as a rate, the lookup error rate, in units of words per lookup error.
  • the lookup error rate is the reciprocal of the lookup error probability.
  • Query probability is the sum, over all (meaningful) decodings which are not unique (meaningful) decodings, of the reference probability of said decodings. This gives the probability that a given word will have more than one meaningful decoding, and therefore a query must be made of the user as to decide which of these decodings to use.
  • the reciprocal of the query probability is the query rate, expressed in units of words per query. The query rate gives the average number of words entered between queries .
  • Substantial Optimality A code will be said to be substantially optimal with respect to a property if it is among the best codes with respect to that property given other constraints imposed on the code. For example, a code on 20 keys may have a lower value of the lookup error rate than a code on 2 keys, and yet the code on 2 keys may be substantially optimal with respect to the lookup error rate given the constraint that the code be on 2 keys.
  • Substantially optimal ergonomic codes will be defined as codes which are simultaneously substantially optimal with respect to each of a collection of ergonomic constraints. Such constraints include but are not limited to key number, lookup error rate and query rate. For these three constraints, pairs of constraints are correlated.
  • Lookup error rates tends to increase with query rate, and both lookup error and query rates tend to increase as key number decreases.
  • the best value possible for a given criterion when this given criterion is the sole optimization criterion may be better than the best possible value obtainable when some other criterion must be optimized as well.
  • the ergonomic constraints relevant to a given design must be decided upon and their importance weighted as an initial step of the optimization methods taught by this invention.
  • an estimate of the optimality of a given code can be obtained from experiments comprising the generation of random codes, as well be discussed in more detail below.
  • Substantial optimality for ambiguous codes is well defined only in reference to a chosen disambiguation method.
  • a code which is substantially optimal with respect to one disambiguation method may not be substantially optimal with respect to another method of disambiguation.
  • At least two disambiguation methods are well known in the art . These are word-based and block-based disambiguation.
  • word-based disambiguation a list of words along with their probabilities is used to choose among alternate decodings of a given encoding in the ambiguous code. For instance, all words in the list which are meaningful decodings of a given encoding may be compared, and the word with the largest probability selected.
  • Block-based disambiguation is similar, except that the list contains fragments of text up to some size, along with the probability of the fragments.
  • sequence-based disambiguation in which a list of sequences is associated with a probability, and disambiguation is effected by reference to this list.
  • space symbol which defines word boundaries in languages such as English is for the purposes of this discussion no different from any other symbol.
  • sequences and sequence probabilities in which said sequences include the "space” symbol, and thus extend beyond word boundaries.
  • sequences which include a wildcard symbol and thus define lists of sequences which contain arbitrary subsequences, which subsequences may or may not correspond to words in the language.
  • Partitions A partition of an integer n is a set of integers such that the sum of the elements of the set is equal to n.
  • a given integer admits many partitions, e.g. the integer 5 has the partition 3:2, but also the partition 2:2:1.
  • Algorithms for generating all the partitions of an integer are well known to those skilled in the art. Most prior art codes use an even-as- possible partition. That is, a partition in which, to the extent possible given the number of keys in relation to the number of letters to be encoded, the number of letters per key is the same. As will be further expanded below, this choice is a sensible choice with respect to some ergonomic considerations, it may be sub-optimal with respect to others .
  • Ambiguous codes may be substantially optimal but not strongly touch typable, strongly touch typable but not substantially optimal, neither substantially optimal nor strongly touch typable, or both substantially optimal and strongly touch typable .
  • the disclosure begins by pointing out how to make ambiguous codes in both of these genera, and identifying whether a code is contained in either of the genera. It then explains how to use codes in both of these genera to make typable devices, and how these codes may be used to solve various design problems confronting the designer of typable devices.
  • One embodiment is optimized with respect to lookup error rate exclusively.
  • This embodiment is designed for a machine with limited memory and computing power, such as a smart card. With such a machine, computing resources may not be available to support a complex querying mechanism for user intervention in the disambiguation process.
  • this machine uses one of the simplest possible disambiguation mechanisms, which comprises systematic selection of the most-probable decoding of any given encoding .
  • Another embodiment is optimized with respect to query rate exclusively.
  • This embodiment is designed for use by the driver of a vehicle, such as an automobile. Though computing power may be available to support a complex querying mechanism, use of such mechanism should be kept to a minimum, so as to distract the driver as little as possible from driving.
  • a next embodiment provides a phone keypad optimized with respect to both lookup error rate and query rate, and which is compatible with the layout of standard telephone keypads .
  • Another embodiment is optimized with respect a conventional criterion: preservation of alphabetic order. Letters are arranged on the standard touch-tone keypad in alphabet order. It is possible to preserve the alphabetic ordering of the conventional telephone keypad and yet reduce lookup and query rates by optimizing over partitions. Optimization over partitions leads to an additional embodiment in which keyboards with substantially optimal query and lookup error are exhibited which preserve as well as possible the traditional Qwerty keyboard arrangement .
  • a further embodiment illustrating the design of keyboards which correspond as well as possible to conventional designs is a keyboard based on an ambiguous code and corresponding to a numeric keypad.
  • a keyboard which can be ergonomically operated in both an ambiguous and a non- ambiguous fashion is desired.
  • keyboards can be optimized for cross-platform compatibility.
  • two keyboards a one-handed keyboard and a two-handed keyboard, are designed to be operated in potentially rapid alteration, in such a way that touch- typing motions used to operate one of the keyboards transfer seamlessly to touch-typing motions used to operate the other keyboard.
  • This keyboard has the additional advantage of having the potential to reduce typing injuries, as well as other objects and advantages, as will be described in the detailed specification.
  • the above-mentioned embodiments taken together show that different keyboard uses imply different kinds of optimality, which, since a given user may need keyboards for several different uses, in turn implies that mechanisms must be provided for several different solutions to co-exist in a single device.
  • a surprising solution to this problem made possible by the small typable device sizes achievable with ambiguous codes, is the twice-foldable personal digital assistant described in this embodiment.
  • the number of input means can be further reduced, in this example 4 input means are used to operate an ambiguous encoding with 16 elements.
  • the number 4 is chosen so that a handheld device embodying this code can be operated using the fingers and thumb of the hand holding the device.
  • Figure 2 shows an operational overview of a strongly touch typable device based on an ambiguous code .
  • a strongly touch typable device based on an ambiguous code .
  • Such a device possesses input means, the manipulation of which 140 causes sequences of encoding symbols to be generated 141.
  • a strongly touch typable ambiguous code is used to map these sequences of encoding symbols to sequences of decoding symbols in step 142.
  • These sequences of encoding symbols may then be selectively output, either on a display for direct observation by the user of the device, or in some electronic form for further processing, transmission, or storage 142.
  • the ambiguous code of the device of figure 2 overview satisfy other ergonomic criteria in addition to strong touch typability.
  • Step 2000 selecting a set of statistically correlated symbols to be represented in an ambiguous code.
  • This step is comprised of the substeps of 2007 selecting a set of reference statistics, and 2008 analyzing the statistical correlation of symbols relative to the statistics selected in step 2007.
  • the goal of these steps is to identify those symbols which are capable of being represented ambiguously. All disambiguation methods work by exploiting correlations between symbols to make predictions about which sequence of decoding symbols should be associated with a given sequence of encoding symbols. If a decoding symbol is distributed randomly throughout all texts to be encoded, then it cannot be represented in an ambiguous code, since no predictions can be made about a randomly distributed symbol.
  • the symbols used to encode that language are sufficiently statistically correlated that an effective ambiguous code for these symbols can be designed.
  • the fine details of steps 2007 and 2008 depend on the natural language to be represented. Analysis of statistical correlation of symbols used in written natural language is a well-known art to linguists .
  • Step 2001 selecting a disambiguation method.
  • block-based and word-based disambiguation use statistical correlation between symbols to make predictions about which sequence of decoding symbols to set in correspondence with a given sequence of encoding symbols.
  • block-based and word-based methods can be augmented though use of higher-level information about a language, such as its syntax and semantics.
  • the goal of this present method is to construct an ambiguous code such that, relative to the selected disambiguation method, optimal selection of a decoding sequence to correspond to each encoding sequence. Therefore, the details of the selected disambiguation method can influence the detailed nature of the ambiguous code to be thus designed. This method will be illustrated with respect to the selection of word-based disambiguation as the disambiguation method, though other disambiguation methods will also be discussed.
  • Step 2002 selecting the number of encoding symbols.
  • the selection of the number of encoding symbols is crucial to the design of a typable device based on ambiguous codes. This selection is made in view of many factors, including the size of the typable device and the acceptable level of ambiguity. These factors and their interplay are best explained in reference to concrete examples; such examples are taken up later in this disclosure.
  • Step 2003 selecting the ergonomic criteria with respect to which the code should be substantially optimal.
  • An essential aspect of this invention is the discovery and definition of several ergonomic criteria which determine the quality of a typable device based on ambiguous codes. These criteria include strong touch typability, lookup rate, query rate, anatomic fidelity, physiological fidelity, conservation of convention, partition structure, cross-platform compatibility, regularity of layout, and scan rate. Depending on the application, one or more of these criteria may be relevant to the design of a typable device.
  • ergonomic criterion When more than one ergonomic criterion is relevant to the design of a typable device, some weighting of the importance of these criteria must be decided upon. It is rarely the case that the same optimum with respect to a given ergonomic criterion can be achieved when that ergonomic criterion is considered in isolation as when it is also necessary to optimize relative to another ergonomic criterion.
  • Step 2005 selecting an optimization method.
  • Two optimization methods will be discussed in more detail below, random selection, and directed random walk. Of the two, random selection is typically easier to implement, yet directed random walk produces better codes. These two methods are representative of a large class of methods which might be appropriate for the design of a given typable device. In some cases, for instance the first chording/ ambiguous code device considered below, the number of codes to be examined is small enough that all of them can be checked exhaustively.
  • Step 2006 applying the optimization method selected in step 2005, whereby substantially optimal ambiguous codes are produced.
  • some skill must be used when applying the method to produce substantially optimal ambiguous codes.
  • each ergonomic criterion first in isolation, whereby an estimate can be made of the code quality ultimately achievable. This estimate can be invaluable for fine-tuning the optimization process, as will be discussed in more detail below, once two optimization methods have been fully introduced.
  • Random Search The basic method for finding a code with good properties is to choose codes at random, test their properties, and select those which have the best properties. Exhaustive enumeration, in which all ' codes in the candidate set are tested, is typically not a viable option since the number of codes is too large to be tested in any reasonable amount of computer time. Random search provides a benchmark by which the utility of other methods of code selection can be measured. Suppose that a set of ergonomic criteria, and a weighting on those criteria is given. One can estimate the substantial optimality of a first ambiguous code with respect to those criteria and those weightings by generating additional ambiguous codes at random. If in a small number of random trials it is possible to find a code with equal or better values with respect to the given ergonomic criteria than the first code, then that first code is not substantially optimal.
  • the first code is substantially optimal .
  • Step 3000 determining a set of relevant constraints which define an appropriate set of codes which contains the candidate code.
  • the set with respect to which the substantial optimality of a candidate code is to be evaluated must be appropriately defined.
  • Some of the potentially relevant constraints are: number of encoding symbols, partition structure, and admission of a specified ordering, such as alphabetic ordering. Each of these constraints limits the set of codes to which the candidate code is appropriately compared to.
  • Step 3001 determining the set of ergonomic criteria with respect to which the candidate code may be substantially optimal.
  • Some of the criteria which might be relevant for the analysis of the candidate code are: lookup error rate, query rate, admission of a specified ordering, such as alphabetic ordering, admission of a regular layout, and anatomic fidelity.
  • steps 3000 and 3001 are performed, a distribution of code properties over a set is defined, and this distribution can be sampled randomly.
  • Figure 5 presents an example in which sets of codes are defined as having 1) an even-as-possible partition, and 2) a specified number of encoding symbols, where the specified number is 7, 9, 11, and 13. This definition completes step 3000. Then it is determined that lookup error is the sole relevant ergonomic criterion. This determination completes step 3001. Together, these steps determine a distribution, the shape of which can be determined by random sampling, steps 3002 and 3003. In the figure 5, 5000 codes from each distribution are selected, completing step 3002, and the lookup error of each is measured, completing step 3003.
  • a candidate code whose substantial optimality to be tested is selected.
  • This code is the 14-key code pn gt cr zk wj a e hi so ud xf ym vl qb proposed by [1] .
  • the lookup error of this code relative to our reference statistics is 105 words/lookup error. Proceeding as above, we determine that 14-key code with an even-as-possible partition with lookup error equal to or better than that of the candidate code can be found in 7 random trials on average.
  • Directed random walk is an iterative optimization method wherein, at each step, a previously best code is used as a seed for generating new codes, one or more of which may be better than the best previously found. As the process is iterated, better and better codes are thus found. The procedure will first be explained intuitively, and then more formally.
  • substantially minimal steps in space of ambiguous codes correspond to single pairwise permutations of assignments of decoding symbols to encoding symbols.
  • the step is completed by choosing the pairwise permutation which gives the largest improvement in the property to be thereby optimized. If there is no largest improvement, then one of the pairwise permutations is chosen at random.
  • the steps of the method are as follows: • 4000 choosing a starting code from the set of candidate codes .
  • step 4005 yields YES, selecting as new starting code the best code from the current set , else, select a new starting code from the current set at random. Upon completion, return to step 4001.
  • Level A This level of touch typability is exemplified by a casual, tolerant typist characterized in that he or she 1) types 20 words per minute and accepts distractions every 15 seconds, that is, a query rate of one query every 5 words on average, and 2) accepts a 2 percent lookup error, that is, a lookup error rate of one error every 50 words, or two and % minutes of typing.
  • Level B This level of touch typability is exemplified by a less casual, less tolerant typist characterized in that he or she 1) types 20 words per minute and accepts distractions every 30 seconds, that is, a query rate of one query every 10 words on average, and 2) accepts a 1 percent lookup error, that is, a lookup error rate of one error every 100 words, or 5 minutes of typing.
  • Level C This level of touch typability is exemplified by a skilled typist characterized in that he or she 1) types 40 words per minute and accepts distractions every 30 seconds, that is, a query every 20 words on average, and 2) accepts a 0.5 percent lookup error, that is, a lookup error every 200 words, or 5 minutes of typing.
  • the method to construct strongly touch touchable codes comprises the following steps: • 5000 Determining quantitative values of acceptable lookup error rate and query rate.
  • step 5004 Deciding if the design criteria are compatible. If the number determined in step 5003 is greater than or equal to the number determined in step 5002, then the design criteria are compatible, otherwise they are not .
  • step 5005 If the design criteria are compatible, as determined in step 5004, apply the optimization procedure selected in step 5001 to construct an appropriate strongly touch-typable ambiguous code. If they are not compatible then the procedure fails. Details of this method are as follows:
  • Step 5000 Determining quantitative values of acceptable lookup error rate and query rate. This could be done by testing of an individual or group of individuals, or by simply preselecting desired values for lookup error rate and query rate, for instance, by selecting a level of strong touch-typability as described above .
  • Step 5001 Selecting an ambiguous code optimization method.
  • two optimization methods were discussed: random search and directed random walk. Random search is less powerful than directed random walk, but may suffice if the number of allowed keys is high enough, and the level of desired strong touch-typability is low enough. An ever weaker method, selection of a code in a single random trial, could be sufficient in some circumstances. To see this in more quantitative detail, some experimental results are discussed in reference to figures 9, 10 and 11.
  • Step 5002 Determining the minimal number of keys required such that using said number of keys and the optimization method selected in step 5001 it is possible to achieve the values of lookup error rate and query rate determined in step 5000.
  • Step 5003 Determining the maximal number of keys allowable given the design of the target typable device.
  • Ambiguous codes will be typically used in small devices, and the number of keys will generally be a compromise between key size and total typable device size.
  • convention may enforce a key number, such as the convention of using 12 keys for a telephone keypad.
  • Step 5004 Deciding if the design criteria are compatible. If the number determined in step 5003 is greater than or equal to the number determined in step
  • the number of keys permissible in a typable device can depend on many factors, and can be more or less rigidly determined by these factors .
  • Step 5005 If the design criteria are compatible, as determined in step 5004, apply the optimization procedure selected in step 5001 to construct an appropriate strongly touch-typable ambiguous code. If they are not compatible then the procedure fails.
  • Smart Card on 9 to 16 letter keys Smart cards are substantially credit-card sized devices containing computer components such as a processor and a memory. They are currently used in applications such as security and banking, but have many other possible uses.
  • This embodiment shows how it is possible to equip a smart- card-sized device with a touch-typable keyboard, and thus vastly expand the range of applications which these devices can serve.
  • smart card users must currently remember a string of digits which is the password for the device.
  • a typable smart card easy-to- remember, though relatively long, pass phrase in natural language could be used in the place of a difficult-to- remember, albeit short, numeric password.
  • Examples of smart-card sized devices to which the teachings of this embodiment could be applied include the personal digital assistants manufactured by the Franklin Corporation and sold under the trademark REX.
  • this smart-card embodiment teaches a low-cost machine for ergonomically and efficiently sending messages using standard touch tones, and standard touch-tone generators.
  • a first disambiguation mechanism is used to provide feedback to the user, at the sending end of a communication, while a second disambiguation mechanism is used at the receiving end of the communication.
  • Strongly touch-typable keyboard Smart card devices are small, so only a small number of substantially full- sized keys can be located on them. If some of the area of the card is to be reserved for a visual display device, then the area available for keys is further reduced.
  • the preferable compromise in number of keys between the requirement of substantially full-sized keys for touch- typability, and the requirement of a large number of keys to allow for low-ambiguity codes, is in the range of 9-16 keys. Two possible layouts for devices with a number of keys in this range are shown in figure 16 and 15. The arrangement and functionality of the keys and their relationship to other components of the smart card will be discussed in detail below.
  • tones For example, let us associate 16 encoding symbols with the 16 DTMF tones, so that said tones physically represent the encoding symbols.
  • the tones will be labelled (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, * , #, A, B, C,D) .
  • the auxiliary set of decoding symbols will be a singleton set consisting of the symbol "space".
  • a candidate sequence is A8A, which corresponds to the following decoding sequences (pkp pkz zkp zkz pyp pyz zyp zyz) . None of these decoding sequences form part of any word in our reference list of meaningful sequences, thus the encoding sequence A8A is a suitable sequence for representing an element of the auxiliary set, and we form the pair (A8A, "space”) to represent the "space” symbol.
  • the "space" symbol can then be associated with an input means, which input means will cause the sequence of tones associated to A8A to be emitted each time said input means is activated.
  • a decoding means will transform the sequence A8A to the "space" symbol.
  • An arbitrarily large auxiliary set of decoding symbols can be represented in this way. It will be appreciated that given the above specification, a programmer of ordinary skill would be easily capable of creating software to automatically generate any desired number of synthesized encoding symbols, given a set of reference statistics, and a first (ambiguous) code for the core set of encoding symbols.
  • An example 16-key substantially optimal ambiguous code suitable for application in the present embodiment is the code aw bi ex d ej fo g hv ky 1 mu n pz qr s t with lookup error rate 4043 words/lookup error, and a query rate of 68 words/query, this code is shown is an example layout 51 on a 16-letter-key smart card in figure 15. This figure also reveals a display means 50 for displaying decodings of encoding symbols entered via the keyboard, and an auxiliary input means 51, which is thumb-activatable, and could be used to encode a variety of additional symbols and mode changes, as will be discussed more fully in reference to other embodiments.
  • the display means 50 is preferably placed in such a way that 1) both the letter input means 51 and the thumb-actuated auxiliary input means 52 are in a comfortable position to be actuated by one hand (in this figure, the right hand) , while, at the same time, allowing the keys to be as large as possible, given the small size of the smart card, and also allowing the screen to be comfortably and fully viewed in the frame formed by the thumb and the index finger of the hand actuating the input means 51 and 52.
  • This unique and preferred arrangement solves the problem of allowing a touch-typable keyboard and a large-as- possible display means to functionally co-exist on a smart card.
  • this code was chosen by directed- random-walk optimization using lookup error as the only criterion of optimality. It is to be noted that lookup errors using this code will occur on average only once every roughly 16 pages of typed text. Thus this code is suitable for accurate communication of substantially long messages, even in the absence of a querying mechanism. If it were desirable to sacrifice some lookup optimality at the sending end in order to reduce processing of queries at the receiving end, an example alternate code optimized for both query and lookup error is aw bu ex d eV pz go hv im ky 1 NQ p r s t with a lookup error rate of 2670 words/lookup and a query rate of 101 words/query.
  • Choice of a code optimized both with respect to lookup error rate and query rate would be appropriate in at least two circumstances, 1) if the smart card were in fact sufficiently powerful to support a query mechanism, and/or 2) a query-based disambiguation mechanism would be used at the receiving end of communications initiated at the smart card. This latter might be the case, for instance, if the user composed messages using a smart card, sent them to another computer over a phone line, and at some later moment performed a second disambiguation pass using a more powerful disambiguation mechanism. Indeed, the second disambiguation pass need not be performed by the person who composed the message, but could be performed by a second person, for instance the first person's secretary.
  • the lookup error rate of this second code is still extremely low, as compared, for instance, to the rate at which even very skilled typists make typing errors, approximately 1 error every 100 words.
  • both of these 16-letter-key codes must be considered strongly touch typable, as a typist typing 20 words per minute will only need to answer a query once every three minutes for the first 16-letter- key-code, and once every five minutes for the second 16- letter-key-code.
  • More than 16 keys are difficult to fit into a smart card format while retaining the advantages of substantially full -sized keys.
  • ambiguous codes on fewer than 9 keys may not be strongly touch typable with respect to the simple disambiguation mechanisms compatible with the smart card's limited computing power.
  • a smart card equipped with simple lookup disambiguation could be operated by a person who is a competent touch typist, needing no feedback from the card as to the progress of the communication, and/or getting feedback from the machinery at the receiving end of the communication, potentially over a phone line and potentially in the form of speech synthesized on the basis of the symbols input by the typist on the smart card. It is desirable, however, to provide feedback directly from the card whenever there are sufficient computing resources built into the card to supply that feedback.
  • This level of accuracy is already enough provide a rough guide to the typist as to the text he or she is in the process of entering on the smart card.
  • This example shows that disambiguation can be accomplished with extremely small amounts of memory; here the only memory required is that needed to store the 16 characters which will be displayed in response to activation of the 16 keys.
  • This approach is scalable in terms of the computing resources required. With successively more memory, 2-, 3-, and higher-block probabilities could be stored and used as the basis of well-known block-based disambiguation, and thus render the text with increasing accuracy for display to the user.
  • block-based disambiguation is well known in the art, it has heretofore proved to be not practical. This example shows the reason for this: block-based disambiguation is not powerful enough to effectively disambiguate codes which are too ambiguous.
  • block-based disambiguation is coupled with a code which is sufficiently strongly touch-typable, sufficiently disambiguous, that it permits effective disambiguation with a block-based method.
  • the prior art has taught away from block-based disambiguation in favor or word-based disambiguation.
  • block-based disambiguation is made operable and viable for practical use.
  • word-based disambiguation is not required to practice the teachings of this invention
  • a micro-processor is not required to practice the teachings of this invention
  • more than one, potentially different, disambiguation mechanisms can be used in the same communication system based on ambiguous codes.
  • Word-based disambiguation, or another disambiguation method could be used at the receiving end of a communication sent from the smart card, while locally the smart card is using simple block- based disambiguation to provide feedback to the user of the smart card.
  • the present embodiment concerns an instance in which query error is the dominant constraint on typable device design. It is generally of value to reduce the query rate since the effort to answer queries distracts from the typing task. In some applications, however, reduction of query rate is of paramount importance. Queries will be displayed on a visual display in most practical implementations of typable devices implementing ambiguous codes. When the vision of the user is otherwise urgently occupied, for example when the user is driving a car, then, for safety reasons, distracting that vision to the evaluation of queries must be kept to a minimum. Even when queries are made by auditory means, it is crucial to minimize driver distraction.
  • both hands of the user are generally occupied in holding the steering wheel of the car, and should preferably not be removed from the steering wheel to operate a typable device.
  • This object can be achieved by embedding the input means of the typable device directly in the steering wheel .
  • any number of input means could be embedded in a steering wheel 200.
  • Many steering wheels comprise crenulations on the inner or rear surface of the wheel to provide better grip for the fingers.
  • four of the first input means 201 are contacted by the fingers of each hand.
  • the region of the steering wheel contacted by the drivers hands may change from moment to moment, for instance when the driver turns the steering wheel through a large angle.
  • a position- sensing means such as a combination of pressure sensitive keys with simple electronic circuitry, which combination will be evident to those skilled in the art.
  • a second plurality of input means 202 can be placed along the outer or upper surface of the steering wheel, whereby one of said second input means is contacted by the thumb of each hand while the steering wheel is grasped by the driver. Again, which of the second input means are contacted by the thumbs of the driver at any one time can be detected by an appropriate position-detecting means.
  • Ambiguous code selection Applying the directed-random- walk method taught by this invention for selecting substantially optimal codes, and optimizing only with respect to the query rate, we construct, for instance, the following code on 8 letter keys: aksz bcev dfi gmo hqt jnw luy prx with a lookup error rate of 70.2 words/lookup error, and a query rate of 4.1 words/query. As throughout this specification, these rates are calculated with respect to our reference statistics, and using simple word-based disambiguation as the disambiguation method. The query rate for this code might well be too high to consider this code to be strongly touch-typable.
  • a typist/driver typing 20 words/minute would be distracted from driving by a query approximately every 12 second, likely too often to be compatible with safe driving. On the other hand, even a skilled typist may not be able to type 20 words per minute while driving, potentially bringing the relationship between query and typing rates into an acceptable range for strong touch typability.
  • the parameter controlling how close the probability must be between most- probable and less-probable decodings must be to invoke a query is a parameter whose value could be selected by the user. Such a mechanism could be of value in any embodiment in which query rate is a relevant ergonomic criterion.
  • the limitation on the number of keys is paramount since the keypad must be compatible with existing telephone equipment which generally have 12 keys.
  • the 26 letters must be distributed over at most 10 keys. In this embodiment both minimal lookup error rate and minimal query rate are desired.
  • Telephone keypad in alphabetic order This embodiment presents a solution for a severely constrained keyboard- design problem in which the number of keys is fixed, the placement of the keys is fixed, and the ordering of symbols on these keys is fixed.
  • This problem arises in the design of a keyboard which 1) preserves as well as possible the familiar alphabetic ordering of the standard ambiguous code, 2) is compatible with existing, standard telephone keypads, and yet 3) has improved lookup error rate and query rate as compared to the standard ambiguous code.
  • These constraints allow a limited freedom to choose the number of keys on which to base the ambiguous code .
  • the standard ambiguous code uses an even-as-possible partition, one may choose an alternate partition and still respect the given constraints.
  • each ordered partition of 26 elements into 10 groups corresponds to a unique ambiguous code. Given sufficient computing time, it would be possible to evaluate the lookup and query errors of each of these codes, and choose the best .
  • An alternate and more efficient procedure is to apply the optimization methods taught by this invention to this constrained optimization problem.
  • This invention teaches that a minimal elementary step in the set of possible codes should be defined, in the absence of information suggesting the use of some more complex elementary step.
  • an ambiguous code is a ordered list of 10 groups of letters, such that all letters occur in exactly one group, and within and across groups, the letters appear in alphabetic order.
  • An example is ab cd ef gh ij kl -tin opqr stuv wxyz .
  • An elementary step consists of moving one letter across one gap. For instance, if we choose the second gap, we can produce in one elementary move either the code abc d ef gh ij kl mn opqr stuv wxyz, by moving the letter c to the left, or the code a bed ef gh ij kl mn opqr stuv wxyz, by moving the letter b to the right.
  • the error rates of this code should be compared to those of standard ambiguous code, with a lookup error rate of 29 words/lookup error, and a query rate of 2.2 words/query.
  • the improvement in lookup error rate is more than a factor of 2
  • the improvement in query rate is nearly a factor of 3 with no sacrifice of easy-to-scan alphabetic ordering, nor compatibility with existing telephone equipment.
  • a strongly touch-typable code substantially optimal with respect to lookup error and query rates is qwe r t yu i o p as d f g hjk 1 zxc vb n m with lookup error every 668 words, and query every 35.5 words, clearly strongly touch typable with respect to a large class of typists and keyboard uses.
  • this code is shown in a preferred arrangement.
  • a typable device with a keyboard as described in this figure would be suitable for note-taking, composing electronic mail, and the like. It would be readily typable with no or minimal learning by anyone familiar with the standard Qwerty keyboard, and, even built with full-sized keys, it would fit easily into a pocket.
  • this code can be laid out in such a way that 18 letters at or very close to their Qwerty positions, these letters are indicated in bold face.
  • the fingers should be placed on the home row such that the index finger of the left hand is on the
  • this layout makes a step from the Qwerty layout in the direction of anatomic fidelity, in that the weight on the home row is increased relative to Qwerty, and the weight on the strongest fingers is increased relative to the Qwerty weight.
  • keyboard design method used to prepare the present embodiment could be applied to the preservation or partial preservation of other conventional keyboard designs, such as the Azerty keyboard used in France.
  • Numeric Keypad-like Keyboards This embodiment has the object of making the advantages of an ambiguous keyboards available to most computer users, with minimal cost and with no change in their existing hardware. These advantages notably include the advantage of one-hand typability, and the advantage of potential compatibility with ambiguous keyboards designed for hand-held devices .
  • Standard 101-key keyboards for workstations and personal computers include a numeric keypad, typically to the right of the part of the keyboard laid out in a Qwerty arrangement. Typically, there is included a set of arrow keys, or other input means effective for moving the cursor, near the numeric keypad.
  • Said numeric keypad 600 has in this example 17 keys of various sizes. Depending on other design constraints, some or all of these keys could be used for punctuation, or other symbols, and these other design constraints could influence the choice of the number of keys to be assigned to letters, the distribution of letters and other symbols over modes and so on.
  • the essential features of this embodiment are:
  • the code illustrated in figure 22 af bu ex d ej gi hz ky 1 mq n ov p r s t w has a lookup error rate of 7483 words/lookup error, and a query rate of 290 words/query.
  • This same code has already been discussed above.
  • the code is laid out in such a way as to preserve in part an alphabetic ordered.
  • the given code has not been optimized relative to alphabetic ordering; it has only been optimized with respect to lookup error rate and query rate . According to the teachings of this invention, it would be possible to simultaneously optimize with respect to lookup error rate, query rate, alphabetic ordering, and/or other ergonomic criteria.
  • auxiliary input means is comprised of 4 keys: up 602, down 603, left 604, and right 605 arrow keys. These functionalities are typically implemented with 4 depressible keys, but they are sometimes implemented as a touchpad, a joystick, or some other device capable of generating multiple, different signals as a function of manipulation by the user. It is to be noted that in figure 22 a plurality of keys are labeled with symbols other than those of the ambiguous code, in this case digits. These other symbols can be obtained by depressing a specified one of the four keys of the auxiliary input means. A possible assignment of modes to input means in the auxiliary keypad is
  • chording keyboard designers have consistently taught away from providing a sufficient number of keys that chording patterns can be kept simple.
  • the number of keys cannot be less than % the number of symbols to be encoded if the complexity of a chord is never more than 2, that is, if it is never required to active more than 2 input means substantially simultaneously in order to unambiguously encode a symbol.
  • the present invention teaches, by contrast to the prior art, to provide a number of keys no less than % the number of symbols to be encoded, if a simple mechanism for unambiguous encoding of those symbols is to be provided.
  • the present invention teaches to provide at least 13 keys to represent the letters [a-z] , and at least one mode changing key, which when active in combination with one of the keys encoding letters serves to uniquely and unambiguously encoding one of the letters associated to said key encoding letters.
  • some keys represent a plurality of symbols with a single keystroke.
  • said single keystroke must be combined with at least one other keystroke, perhaps of the same key, to permit each individual symbol associated to the key to be singled out.
  • said combination of keystrokes be as simple as possible, and for a touch typability, it is preferable that substantially the same combination of strokes is used for unambiguous entry of all symbols.
  • the typable device further comprises a mode key 701 and a means for placing the device in either ambiguous or unambiguous text-entry mode.
  • the means for placing the typable device in ambiguous or unambiguous text-entry mode could be a software means which detects, depending on context, which of these modes is required at any given instant, or a key devoted to this mode change, or a particular pattern of input on other input means, such as a double tap on the mode-changing key 701.
  • activation of the 701 key causes one a selected symbol from the two symbols associated with a key in the plurality 700 to be encoded when said key in the plurality 700 is activated substantially simultaneously with the 701 key.
  • each key in the plurality 700 it is preferable to think of the pair of symbols on each key in the plurality 700 to be composed of a left symbol and a right symbol, and to label the keys with the left symbol on the left and the right symbol on the right. Then one of these, without loss of generality, the left of these, is associated with activation of the 701 key whereby unambiguous text entry can be achieved.
  • the left symbol is selected unambiguously, and if the same key in the plurality 700 is activated without the 701 key being substantially simultaneously activated, then the right symbol is selected unambiguously.
  • the keyboard is designed to incorporate additional modes, then this same method of unambiguous text entry could be used also in reference to the symbols in the other modes.
  • a query has been detected, that is, the disambiguation mechanism has discovered that more than one meaningful decoding sequence in the database corresponds to the input encoding sequence . Entrance in the query mode causes a means to draw the users attention to the decoding under query to be display. These means could be visual means such as the framebox 702 shown in figure 23.
  • the possible decodings are then ordered according to their likelihood (step 802) . Then, (step 804) the most- likely decoding is displayed on the screen, in context with the text previously entered, in a place indicated by the attention means.
  • the software is then prepared to detect either input from the scroll key, or some other key (step 806) . If some input is received from some other key, then the means to draw attention to the user is removed (step 808) , the decoding is added to the text previously entered (step 810) , and ambiguous text entry mode is reentered. On the other hand, if input from the scroll key is detected at step 806, then a test is performed to see if there exists any other meaningful decodings in the data base 812. If there is, the current decoding is replaced with the next most probable decoding (step 814) , and step 806 is returned to.
  • the typable device enters unambiguous text entry mode as described above (step 816) , when the decoding sequence has been unambiguously entered, the means to draw attention to the user is removed (step 808) , the unambiguously entered decoding is added to the existing text (step 810) and ambiguous text entry mode is reentered (step 818) .
  • This embodiment concerns a one-handed keyboard suitable for entry of data into forms, such as spreadsheets or web-based forms. It will be of use for interaction with a program, such as a game or a drawing program, 1) which requires quick alternation of typing and cursor movement, and/or 2) where the symbol set which is appropriate for entry may vary depending on where the cursor is on the screen.
  • a program such as a game or a drawing program
  • the symbol set which is appropriate for entry may vary depending on where the cursor is on the screen.
  • users Using the standard computing configuration of a Qwerty keyboard and a mouse, users must remove their hands from the keyboard to move the mouse. In tasks which involve both typing and mouse manipulation in rapid succession, such as labeling a design presented on the computer screen, or filling in a form, such as an HTML form, this alternating use of mouse and keyboard can be quite slow and laborious.
  • a one-handed keyboard is mounted in a frame which may be moved over a surface and thus perform the functions of a mouse as well as a keyboard. Since users may prefer to use a two-handed keyboard for predominantly text-entry tasks, and intermix usage of the one-handed keyboard with use of the one-handed keyboard, it is desirable to have the layout of keys on both keyboards be as similar as possible, so as to permit seamless transfer of touch-typing skills from the two-handed to the one- handed keyboard.
  • the design strategy is as follows:
  • the pairing is done so that members of the pair are laid out symmetrically, with respect to a symmetry plane which cuts the keyboard at the center, and runs from the bottom to the top of the keyboard.
  • FIG 28 a detailed view of the one-handed keyboard, we see how the objects of this embodiment are achieved by equipping the keyboard with a plurality of keys 300, a thumb-actuatable input means
  • the keyboard may be further equipped with a communication means to enable symbol selections by means of the keyboard to be communicated to the computer.
  • This communication means could be simply a wire, or a wireless communication means such as an infrared communication means.
  • the keyboard is slidably supported on a support means, such as a desktop, whereby the keyboard can be moved over the support means by means of pressure from the base of the palm of the hand actuating the keyboard.
  • the keyboard is preferably equipped with a means for palm grip means for engaging said base of the palm to allow said pressure to be effective in moving the keyboard.
  • Said means for engaging said base of palm of the hand operating the keyboard are preferably formed means where the form is such that slight pressure is effective to move the keyboard in any desired direction.
  • the form could be an indentation in the body of the keyboard which securely engages the base of the palm.
  • this device performs the functions of a mouse, it bears little physical similarity to a mouse. Its form factor is determined by the anatomy of the hand in a comfortable position for touch typing. The device must therefore be considerably larger than a standard mouse, and the means for moving the device substantially different.
  • said keyboard is equipped with a motion sensing means, such as a trackball, familiar to those skilled in the art.
  • the keyboard 305 can be further equipped with a biasing means, such as springs, to lift the keyboard away from the support means when the weight of the hand on the keyboard is lessened, thus facilitating movement.
  • a biasing means such as springs
  • the two-handed keyboard may thereby be used for long typing episodes, uninterrupted by the need to move a mouse, and the one-handed keyboard for quick typing/mouse movement alternation.
  • Visual Representation of the Keyboard It will be appreciated that when using a single device which supports more than one ambiguous codes, or more than one mode, it may be helpful to the user to have a representation of the current association of keys with symbols at any given moment displayed on the displayed device. While such a representation could be of value for any typable device, it is of particular utility for touch-typable devices, since for such devices, some or all of the keys are hidden from view (typically by the fingers of the operator) while in use. Thus, any display means integrated into the keys is of limited utility for the touch typist. The most useful visual representations are those in which the physical layout of the keyboard is represented in the visual display. Such a device 304 is shown in figure 28, but could be incorporated in many of the embodiments described in this disclosure.
  • keyboards have been designed in an attempt to attenuate the stress of the repetitive motions involved in typing. It has long been recognized that the most effective means to reduce typing injuries is for the typist to take regular breaks from typing. This is seldom practical, however, as typists are often under time pressure to complete their typing work.
  • the one-handed keyboard just described offers a solution to this problem. While the one-handed version of the present embodiment has been described as being used with the right hand, it is evident that the same design methods lead to a left- handed one-hand keyboard as well. Each of these keyboards is capable of encoding all of the same symbols.
  • a therapeutic typable device equipped with both a right- handed and a left-handed keyboard such as both a left- and a right-handed mouse/keyboard as described above, could be operated with either the left or the right hand in alteration.
  • a user wishing to reduce repetitive-stress injuries could type for some period of time, for instance, for 15 minutes, using one of the keyboards, and then switch for the next period of time to the other keyboard, whereby the user gives each hand a resting period, with no decrement to typing productivity.
  • the typable device could be equipped with a locking means which would alternately lock one or the other of the keyboards, enforcing alternating use. It is to be appreciated that when therapy is completed, the user could return to a two- handed version of the keyboard, with no relearning of typing skills required.
  • Foldable PDA We saw in the smart-card embodiment described above that it is convenient and ergonomic to place the text screen of a typable device based on ambiguous codes in such a way that part of the keyboard is manipulated by the fingers of one or both hands and the thumb may be used to actuate further input means, in particular, mode-changing input means, in the region above the thumb or thumbs and to the side of the finger- manipulated part of the keyboard.
  • the present embodiment concerns a typable device at a somewhat larger scale which uses the same concept in conjunction with a folding concept in order to design a twice-foldable information appliance which may ergonomically perform different functions when it is unfolded, once folded, and twice folded.
  • This twice-foldable design is a surprising consequence of ambiguous codes. It is remarkable that typable devices built by the methods taught by the present invention permit keyboards which are at once 1) effective for the coding of natural language, 2) use substantially full-size keys, and 3) are small enough to be placed in a pocket or a small hand bag.
  • This embodiment is based on building a hand-held computing device from substantially same-sized elementary units which are the size of a keyboard designed for an ambiguous code, said units being configurable in a variety of ways depending on the instant needs of a user.
  • the elementary units can be foldably and/or detachably connected to each other in each of a variety of configurations. In this way the computing device can alternately play the role of a laptop computer, a personal digital assistant, a telephone, a gaming device, and so on.
  • FIG 29 shows such a device in the unfolded state. It is thus revealed that one of the parts 900 has a first surface which functions as a first visual display, while 901 has a first surface which functions as a first keyboard and 902 has a first surface which functions as a second keyboard.
  • the keyboard layout on said first and second keyboards is a 13 -letter-key keyboard, though many other choices are possible.
  • the final part 903 has a first surface which functions as a pair of mode-changing thumb switches, to be used in combination with the said first and second keyboards.
  • the first keyboard is meant to be operated with the right hand. It will be evident to those skilled in the art that a similar configuration exists which is typable with the left hand, and that this similar configuration can be obtained by simple rearrangement and reattachment of the four parts. Indeed, a two-handed keyboard can be obtained from by detachment and rearrangement of the four units as shown in figure 33.
  • Figure 30 shows the unfolded twice-foldable computer in a bottom view.
  • Part 904 is a telephone keypad 905 and corresponding second visual display 906.
  • Part 907 is a third visual display, and part 908 a third keyboard.
  • Parts 904, 905, 906, 907 form the second surfaces of parts 900, 901, 902, 903 respectively.
  • Folding the computer along the line 908 shown in figures 29 and 30 we obtain the configuration shown in figure 31.
  • the third keyboard is exposed for typing, and the third visual display is used as the corresponding display.
  • the keyboard layout is a 12 -key keyboard, but many other choices are possible.
  • This configuration might be used when, due to time or space limitations, the user is unable or unwilling to open the computer to its full extent. It might also be used to supply a different functionality than the fully unfolded computer, such as a gaming functionality.
  • the computer can be folded along the fold 909 shown in figure 31 to provide the twice-folded configuration shown in figure 32.
  • This is the configuration in which the computer would be typically kept for transportation; in this configuration the device could be small enough to fit into a pocket.
  • the telephone functionality is exposed for use. For many users, this will be the most frequently used configuration of the device. It will be noted that we have shown the telephone keypad with the ambiguous code of a previous embodiment, though many other choices are possible.
  • devices of the PALM PILOT class typically comprise: a touch screen 1000, a touch-sensitive region 1001 which is used for entering characters via hand-writing recognition software.
  • Said touch-sensitive region may be a subregion of the touch screen, or may be implemented separately.
  • One of the essential and surprising features of the present embodiment is that by use of a touch-typable keyboard in a device comprising a touch screen, we design a radically new user interface for information appliances such that keyboards need not compete for limited screen space with applications programs.
  • the same touch screen area can be used both for the application program and for the keyboard.
  • the keyboard is weakly touch typable, then the keyboard does not need to be displayed to the user to be operative. The user's fingers "know" where the keys are, without visual referents. Thus, the keyboard can be used to enter data into which ever application program is currently displayed on the touchscreen. If, further, the keyboard is strongly touch typable, then the keyboard can be used to produce high quality text, even if no screen space is used for querying feedback to the user.
  • touch screens to easily present alternate keyboard layouts is used in this embodiment to enable a given input means to represent many different symbols or groups of symbols, depending on the "mode" of the keyboard at any given time.
  • each input means is associated with a specified region of the touch screen.
  • the dual function of the touch screen as a visual display and as a plurality of mechanically activated input means is exploited to give each input means different functions and different labels depending on mode. It will be appreciated, however, that the same effect could be obtained with mechanical keys of a traditional, depressable structure by equipping each mechanical key with its own display device. In this way, the methods for mode changing here specified in reference to a touchscreen comprising device could be applied to devices comprising mechanical keys, such as many of the other devices specified in the present disclosure.
  • Mode Selection One strategy in keyboard design to increase the number of symbols which can be encoded given a fixed number of keys is to augment the keyboard with a number of mode-changing keys. Pressing a mode-changing key changes the symbol encoded by a plurality of other keys.
  • the canonical example is the shift key of the standard typewriter keyboard which changes the symbol encoded by the letter keys from lower case to upper case.
  • Upper-case letters could in principle be encoded on a separate set of keys from the keys encoding lower-case letters, and if upper-case letters occurred with the same frequency as lower-case letters in typical communications, then this could be a defensible choice.
  • the collection of symbols to be encoded by a keyboard will be divided into subsets corresponding to modes. Modes can be at least partially ordered according to how much manipulation is required on the part of the user to obtain each mode and/or how frequently the symbols in each mode are used. Thus we can speak of primary, secondary, tertiary modes and so on in order of increasing amounts of manipulation required to obtain each mode and/or decreasing probability of the symbols in the mode. Letter symbols are preferably placed in the first mode or modes. The subtle design issues have to do with methods for assigning non-letter symbols to modes, and arranging the spatial layout of each mode.
  • a first statistical measure to be taken into account is the probability of non-letter symbols.
  • Some of these non-letter symbols such as punctuation marks and digits, are essential to communication and may occur with a frequency rivalling or exceeding those of letter symbols. These punctuation marks are candidates for inclusion in the primary or secondary symbol set in any effective keyboard design.
  • Next to be considered are correlations which arise from non-letter acting in concert with other non-letter symbols.
  • Some non-letter symbols have conventional and conceptual relationships with other non- letter symbols, for example, the symbol (left arenthesis) is related to the symbol) (right parenthesis) , as the two symbols act together to express meaning. The symbol is related to the symbol , as the two symbols express similar meanings (end of a phrase or sentence) .
  • Non-letter symbols may also have statistical, conventional, and conceptual relationships with letter symbols. For some symbols, it is possible to analyze their statistical relationships with each other with reference to a corpus. For others, user studies are needed, or specialized software to capture these symbols for statistical analysis, since the symbol may never appear in a text. Examples here are "backspace”, "page up”, and other symbols which are used to edit, examine, or otherwise manipulate a text.
  • a next step in the assignment of symbols to modes is to arrange the symbols in such a way that the statistical, conventional, and conceptual relationships are best satisfied.
  • a further constraint which could be taken into account is the mnemonic potential of the arrangement.
  • all symbols are arranged within and across modes in a way that "makes sense", that is, that the symbol pattern is simple, familiar, preferably visually well structured. Even well-trained touch typists may revert to a visual scanning mode to find infrequently used symbols on a keyboard.
  • mnemonic potential may be the overriding concern in the arrangement of modes devoted to less-frequently used symbols. It is to be appreciated that mnemonic potential can be quantified using experimental protocols for memorization tasks well- known to psychologists.
  • the first mode (figure 36A) contains an ambiguous code for the letters, a space/backspace key, a basic punctuation key, and a key for shifting modes in either the forward or the backward directions.
  • the second mode (figure 36B) contains keys for the digits, and certain punctuation marks, arranged so that this mode can function either as a telephone, or as a rudimentary calculator/numeric keypad.
  • the third mode contains additional punctuation marks, arranged so that 1) a shift key relates symbols with related meanings, such as open and closed parentheses, or, if there is no related meaning, related symbol shapes, as an aid to remember the symbol placements.
  • a convention is applied whereby “hard” symbols, more angular symbols, are on the left, while “soft” symbols, more curved symbols, are on the right. Since all or most keys have exactly two symbols, ergonomic disambiguation mechanisms as described above can operate in each mode .
  • keyboards displayed on a touch-screen device in the PALM PILOT class comprise a keyboard occupying one part of the screen, while the rest of the screen is devoted to an application program which receives input from the keyboard, such as an address book application. Since display real estate in such devices is extremely limited, sharing the display between keyboard and application program results in both keyboard and application program being very small. Keyboards used in present devices are not meant to be practically touch typable, nor could they be, given their extremely small size. However, application of the methods of this invention produces keyboards which are small enough to be touch typable, even in the limited environment of the touch screen of a personal digital assistant .
  • the keyboard since the keyboard is touch-typable, it does not have to be displayed to the user. The user's fingers "know" where the keys are, without the user having to see them. Thus the keyboard can be made transparent, occupying the entire touch screen, while the application program can be opaque, and also occupy the entire touch screen. Displayed in this way, the user types directly on the application program to produce input to it.
  • a keyboard displayed in this way 1003 is shown with an application program 1002 in this case a drawing program displaying a drawing. Since it is impossible to draw a transparent keyboard, the keyboard is indicated in this figure in a shade of gray, while the application program is shown in black. Indeed, it would be possible to allow the user to select the level of transparency of the keyboard, for example, as a function of his or her level of touch typing skill .
  • chording patterns which require but two keys to be activated substantially simultaneously, such as the chording pattern which causes a Qwerty keyboard to encode capital letters, are readily learnable and can therefore be adopted by a large user community.
  • chording patterns any more complex than this will not become generally accepted.
  • chording methods and ambiguous-code methods.
  • One aspect of the present invention is to teach how to synergistically combine these two methods.
  • chording methods 1) methods in which a key or keys are reserved for the function of forming chords, an example is the familiar shift key used for keying uppercase letters by a chording combination of the shift key with a letter key, and we will generally refer to such keys as shift keys, 2) methods in which chords are formed by activating a plurality of letter keys substantially simultaneously.
  • first of these methods is used, in a subsequent embodiment, the second of these methods is used.
  • chords must require no more than a pair of keys to be activated substantially simultaneously.
  • one of the pair being a key reserved for forming chords, and the other a key corresponding to at least one decoding symbol. Rare symbols may still require more than two keys to be activated substantially simultaneously, and very frequent symbols could be associated with a single input means without exceeding the scope of this invention.
  • At least one of the decoding symbols is a strongly correlated symbol.
  • the disambiguation software may be able to correct for this error.
  • chording and ambiguous-code methods are combined according to these teachings, surprising and synergistic results are obtained as will be demonstrated by the present embodiment in which a hybrid chording/ambiguous-code method is applied to a telephone embodying the standard ambiguous code.
  • the standard ambiguous code has rather poor lookup error and query rate. It is therefore quite extraordinary that using a hybrid method a keyboard based on the standard ambiguous code can be made (level C) strongly touch typable.
  • the objects of this embodiment are to produce a keyboard which is
  • a standard telephone embodying the standard ambiguous code is shown in figure 38. It is seen that a plurality of keys 10000 are used to encode letters and digits, there are eight of these. Two keys 10001, 10002 encode only digits, and two keys 10003,10004 encode the non-letter symbols * and # respectively. In this embodiment, one of the keys selected from the group consisting of 10001, 10002, 10003, 10004 will be used as a mode-changing key, preferable key 10001 encoding the digit 1. This selected key will be referred to as the shift key, for reasons which will become evident. Key 10001 can be conveniently activated by the thumb of the left hand while the telephone is held in the left hand, while the right hand is used to activate the other keys. For an embodiment in which the right thumb is used to active the shift key while the telephone is held in the right hand, key 10004 can be used as the shift key.
  • This best code is abC dEf gHi jkL mNo pqrS Tuv wxYz where the elements of the shift set are written with uppercase letters. It is to be emphasized again that this code is the best code with respect to our reference statistics, other statistics may yield other best codes, though it appears to be among the best for statistics drawn from many alternate corpora of English. It should be further appreciated that the same hybrid chording/ambiguous code method could be applied to arbitrary ambiguous codes in which the underlying ambiguous code is not constrained to be the standard ambiguous code, indeed is not constrained to be in alphabetic ordering, or only 8 keys, or with an even-as-possible partition.
  • the letters which form the shift set are preferably represented on the corresponding key using an uppercase letter, while the letters in the nonshift set are represented as a lowercase letter, as shown in figure 38.
  • the two sets could be indicated by lettering varying in size, color, typeface etc.
  • the disambiguation mechanism corresponding to this embodiment could be physically located within the telephone, at the sending end of the communication, and or at the receiving end of the communication, for instance at a central computer which the user contacts by telephone.
  • the *, # and 0 keys can be used to encode at least 6 non-letter symbols, such as punctuation symbols, mode-shift symbols, and the like.
  • the keyboard of the present embodiment could be operated in such a manner that the shift key is pressed at times when it should not be to encode the intended text, and at other times the shift key will not be pressed when it should be. Often, such a manipulation will result in a meaningless decoding if the disambiguation device is expecting correctly typed encoding sequences in the hybrid chording/ambiguous code . In these cases, rather than issuing a query, an alternate disambiguation can be attempted in which the shift key activation is ignored, and the encoding sequence is interpreted as being an encoding sequence in the standard ambiguous code. Often, this interpretation will recover the text intended by the user.
  • Touch-typing-oriented querying It is preferable in this embodiment to use the selected shift key as the scroll key for querying, when querying is permitted, as described above. It will be appreciated that whether the key functions as a shift key or a scroll key at any given moment can be determined automatically given the appropriate software. When the device is in querying mode the key functions as a scroll key, and otherwise functions as a shift key.
  • shift keys Referring again to figure 38, we note that this embodiment has been designed to be operable using existing, standard, telephones. If telephones are manufactured with use of this embodiment in mind, they are preferably equipped with additional key or keys 1005 to function as the shift key. It is preferred to place these additional keys on the sides of the telephone, where they can be actuated by the thumb of the hand holding the telephone; such a placement is shown in figure 38. Additional keys to be actuated by the fingers of the hand holding the telephone (either the left or the right hand) may also be used 10006.
  • the query rate for CEHLNSTY can be improved to 1 query every 46 words, by eliminating words whose total probability is less than one part in 50 thousand.
  • This culling can be achieved for instance by application of a "gap factor” given by the ratio between two words in the query, e.g. the most frequent and the least frequent. If, for instance, the gap factor is set to 500, the distribution of figure xxx is obtained, two codes, the standard ambiguous code (SAC) and the CEHLNSTY code are particularly pointed out in this drawing.
  • Ill Handling accents Many languages are written with letters which may appear in both an accented and an unaccented form. For example, in French, “e” may be written as “e”, “e”, or “e” . It is generally important to distinguish these accented letters. Without accents, for instance, the word “eleve” (meaning “student”) can be ambiguous with the word “eleve” (meaning “raised”).
  • One natural approach is to use another shift key, which we can call an accent-shift key which has the function of selecting an accented version of a letter when used in combination with a key encoding that letter.
  • this accent-shift key be operated in a manner similar to the way the usual shift key is operated, e.g. such that thumb motion in one direction is used to encode a regular shift operation, while thumb motion in an opposite direction is used to encode the accent-shift operation.
  • Multi-Language Ambiguous Codes Since the statistics of one language are typically different from the statistics of another language, a code which is substantially optimal with respect to one language may not be substantially optimal with respect to another language. A code which is strongly touch typable with respect to one language may not be strongly touch typable with respect to another language .
  • CEHLNSTY optimized for English, performs less well for French than a code specifically chosen for its optimality with respect to French.
  • CEHLNSTY remains strongly touch typable with respect French, though this will not be the case with respect to all languages.
  • a typable device for instance, a mobile phone
  • keys labeled with the ambiguous code for which it is designed it is useful to have a single code which applies to many languages, so that this labelling can be done in the same way for all machines in a production run, regardless of the target linguistic community.
  • the step of weighting ergonomic criteria with respect to each other can include as a sub-step the step of weighting multiple languages with respect to each other.
  • Different weighting schemes are appropriate in different circumstances. For instance, one may choose to simultaneously optimize with respect to statistics of English and German, and yet weight performance of the code with respect to English as more important than performance with respect to German.
  • a preferred weighting method is one in which the minimum performance is maximized, such a procedure will be referred to as a mini-max procedure.
  • a distinguished input means can be used to form chords with input means encoding ambiguously coded symbols in order to reduce the ambiguity of the overall system.
  • This present embodiment shows how the same input means can be used both for chord formation and for encoding ambiguously encoded symbols.
  • the ambiguous code can be expressed as a multi-level code: a first sequence of input means manipulations serves to select a first subset of decoding symbols, a second sequence of input means manipulations serves to select a second subset of decoding symbols, and so on.
  • the second subset is a subset of the first subset, the third subset a subset of the second subset (and thus a subset of the first subset) , and so on.
  • This is a "divide and conquer” approach, as such well known to those in the art.
  • the number of successive subdivisions of the set of symbols can be limited by making the smallest subsets contain more than one symbol , and thus represent an ambiguous code, nor b) that the manner of subdivision can be chosen so as to minimize the ambiguity of the final ambiguous code, nor c) that ambiguity reduction can be optimized while simultaneously optimizing other ergonomic criteria, such as adherence to convention, nor d) that the transition between levels in the hierarchy can be accomplished with chords consisting of pairs of key presses only.
  • This embodiment is a device which is strongly touch-typable with a single hand. It has the additional desirable characteristics of
  • this device can be configured such that, in addition to the above-stated ergonomic criteria, a new ergonomic criterion, scan time, is also optimized. Optimization of scan time will be discussed in a section below.
  • a set of second-level decoding symbols are selected. These are the symbols that are to be represented by the ambiguous code, and might include, for example for English, the letters a through z .
  • an ergonomic criterion is selected for the over-all multi-level code.
  • This ergonomic criterion could be, for example, strong touch typability or lookup error. In general, many ergonomic criteria of the multi-level code could be simultaneously selected.
  • the second-level decoding symbols are divided into subsets. An encoding symbol is assigned to each second-level subset in such a way that the overall code is optimized with respect to the selected ergonomic criterion. Up to this point, the construction is not different from the construction of any optimized ambiguous code. However, there may be additional constraints, for instance on the allowed number of encoding symbols, such that the next step of construction can be executed.
  • the second-level encoding symbols are collected into groups. These groups are treated as decoding symbols for a first-level ambiguous code. Otherwise said, the encoding symbols of the second-level code become decoding symbols for the first-level code. Hence, a first-level encoding symbol is assigned to each group, forming a first-level ambiguous code. Additional optimization of ergonomic criteria can be performed in the assignment of second-level symbols into groups. In general, each level in a multi-level code can be optimized with respect to different ergonomic criteria. These criteria may be the same, or may be different from, the ergonomic criteria with respect to which the over-all multi-level code is optimized. In the final step 154, the multi-level code thus constructed is embodied in a typable device.
  • FIG 40 The overview of the method of construction of this embodiment is shown in figure 40.
  • three ergonomic criterion are selected for the over-all multi-level code, two criteria for the first-level code and three for the second-level code which comprise the multi-level code.
  • the three ergonomic criteria applied to the multi-level code are strong touch typability, query error, and lookup error.
  • the first-level code is optimized relative to anatomic fidelity, and alphabetic ordering
  • the second-level code is optimized relative to evenness of partition, anatomic fidelity, and substantial alphabetic ordering.
  • the first step 3100 in the construction of this embodiment is the selection of (second-level) decoding symbols. These are the letters a-z. Then, strong touch typability, query error, and lookup error are selected as ergonomic criteria for the multi-level code in steps 3101, 3102, and 3103 respectively. Then, in step 3104, anatomic fidelity is selected as a ergonomic criterion. Since this device is meant to be typable using the fingers of the hand holding the device, anatomic fidelity is maximized when there are 4 input means and 4 corresponding first-level encoding symbols, one for each finger.
  • Anatomic fidelity is chosen as an ergonomic criterion for the second-level code in step 3105.
  • Each encoding symbols in the first-level code will correspond to several encoding symbols for the second-level code.
  • Anatomic fidelity of the second-level code is maximized if each of the 4 first-level symbols corresponds to 4 second-level encoding symbols, so the number of second-level encoding symbols should be 16 for anatomic fidelity to be maximized.
  • 16 second-level encoding symbols can be associated with second-level decoding symbols such that evenness of partition is maximized if the 26 second-level decoding symbols are distributed over the second-level encoding symbols such that either 1 or 2 second-level decoding symbols are associated with each of the 16 second-level encoding symbols. This distribution implies, in turn, that between 4 and 8 second-level decoding symbols will be ultimately associated with each of the 4 first-level decoding symbols.
  • step 3106 alphabetic ordering is selected as an ergonomic criterion for the first-level code. Optimizing with respect to this criterion requires simultaneous optimization of both the first- and second-level codes. What is required is that the letters a-z must be displayable in alphabetic order on the displays corresponding to the input means associated with each finger respectively. Since these displays are arranged in order of the fingers, this implies in turn that letters from the first part of the alphabet must be associated to second-level decoding symbols which are in turn associated to the first-level encoding symbol which is associated to input means associated to the first finger.
  • a second group of letters following the first group in alphabetic order, must be assigned to second-level encoding symbols associated to the first-order encoding symbol associated with the input means associated to the next finger, and so on for the other two first-level encoding symbols.
  • Optimizing with respect to alphabetic ordering thus corresponds to choosing an ordered partition of the 26 letters, in the same way as has been discussed for other embodiments of this invention.
  • each of the 4 elements of the ordered partition must have between 4 and 8 subelements, so that all of the ergonomic criteria listed can simultaneously optimized.
  • codes with even-as-possible partitions, even for the first-level code can be found, while optimizing as well with respect to all of the other ergonomic criteria considered.
  • step 3107 substantial alphabetic ordering is chosen as an ergonomic criterion of the second-level ambiguous code. This means that it should be possible to lay out the letters as well as possible in alphabet ordering, given all of the other constraints on the assignment of letters to second-level encoding symbols. Divergences from strict alphabetic ordering can be measured in any number of ways, for instance by the number of pairwise permutations required to bring a given ordering into strict alphabetic ordering.
  • the symbol-input typable part of the device must be able to be held in one hand, and be typable by the hand holding the device, and that hand only.
  • most of the symbols can be input though sequences of manipulation of but 5 input means : 4 input means operable by the fingers of the hand holding the device 2100-2103 and 1 input means operated by the thumb of the hand holding the device 2104.
  • the device shown in figure 41 is meant to be held in the left hand; it is evident that the symmetric device designed to be held in the right hand or an ambidextrous device operable by either hand could also be constructed.
  • the 2100-2103 is a visual display 2106-2109 showing the elements of the subset currently associated with the given input means. Operating the input means selects the corresponding subset.
  • the input means 2104 can be used to further refine the subset selection and/or be used to select other subsets of symbols.
  • the single symbol "space" can be associated with the input means 2104; this or other symbols associated with input means 2104 can be preferably displayed on display means 2110.
  • the letters [a-z] can be distributed over the 4 input means 2100-2103.
  • the distribution of letters over the input means is preferably chosen so as to minimize the ambiguity (lookup error rate and/or query rate) of the resulting code, while simultaneously adhering to the convention of alphabetic ordering. This adherence aids the novice user in finding a needed letter by simply scanning the candidate letters.
  • Figure 42 shows an arrangement of the letters [a-z] in which the letters [a-f] are associated with the first input means 2100 , [g-1] with the second input means 2101, [m-r] with the third input means 2102, and finally [s-z] with the fourth input means 2103.
  • These associations constitute first-level subsets in a first-level code.
  • the utility of this limitation will become evident shortly, and it will be evident to one skilled in the art how to extend the teachings of this embodiment to languages with a different number of symbols, and a different number of input means .
  • Figure 43 is a table of four columns and four rows. The columns are labeled by the input means activated at the first step, the rows by the symbols associated to each input means at the second step. Thus, for instance, if input means 2100 is first activated, then at the second step, the symbols ac will be associated to input means 2100, be to the input means 2101, etc. This assignment is chosen to minimize lookup error and query rates, given the constraints on subset size described above. The lookup error and query rates for this code are (1100,69) using our reference statistics.
  • the letters in the first level subsets are arrangeable in alphabetic ordering, but the letters in the second-level subsets are only partially arrangeable in alphabetic ordering. It was decided for this example to loosen the alphabet ordering constraint at the second level in order to permit better query and lookup rates, and to produce a code which is as strongly touch typable as possible.
  • alphabetic ordering can be optimized, or not, just like any other ergonomic criterion, and that weighting of optimization properties can be different at different levels in a multi-level ambiguous code.
  • the advantage, again, of alphabetic ordering is that it reduces scan time, especially for novice users. Since the number of symbols displayed at the second level is small, scan time is in any case small, and can be further reduced by mechanisms to be discussed presently.
  • FIG 44 shows an example operation of the device in which the user types the letter e.
  • e is associated with input means 2100 by the first level code.
  • the user activates this input means, and the display becomes that shown in figure 44.
  • the letter e is associated with the input means 2101.
  • this input means is manipulated, the letter e is output.
  • the same sequence of manipulations of input means serves also to select the letter b, so the code is ambiguous.
  • Words are entered by successively selecting the required letters in this manner, and terminating the word by activation of the input means 2104 associated with the thumb, two-hand operation.
  • this input method can form the basis of a one-hand/two-hand embodiment. More explicitly, if one hand is used to indicate the first stroke of each letter, and the second hand is used to indicate the second stroke of each letter, then first and second-stroke information could be input simultaneously. There are numerous physical embodiments which could be based on this remark.
  • the "fingering" mechanism of [4] could be the physical substrate upon which a one-hand/two-hand embodiment could be based.
  • the code proposed by [4] is based on motion sensors capable of sensing several positions per finger, to encode each letter unambiguously. This requires relatively sophisticated sensors. However, using a two-handed variant of the present embodiment, simpler sensors could be used. These sensors would need only record binary (up/down) information for each finger. Both software and hardware complexity could be reduced in this manner. In addition, a machine build according to the teachings of this invention would be simpler for the user to learn and operate .
  • Visual Cache Scan time is the time it takes to visually locate a desired letter from a set of letters.
  • the hunt-and-peck typist visually scans the keyboard to find a next letter and then presses the corresponding key.
  • Scan time is determined by a number of factors, including the user's familiarity with the layout of a keyboard.
  • the hunt-and-peck typist may know basically where the desired key is, and is using visual scanning only for confirmation, or precise localization. It is to improve scan time, through the familiarity of typical users with an alphabetic ordering, that alphabetic ordering was chosen for the first-level code of this embodiment.
  • alphabetic ordering certain letters are selected from the group of letters on a given key for display in a distinguished, selected area of the visual display associated with the key. These letters are the most likely-to-be-selected letters at any given moment, and placing them in a distinguished position makes them easier to find.
  • the letters a,i,o,t By placing the letters a,i,o,t in a distinguished portion of the display, for instance the upper-left hand corner of the display area associated with each input means. This makes these letters the first-encountered letters in a standard left-to-right, top-to-bottom visual scan of each associated display. Preferably, other than this selection of a single letter out of alphabetic order, alphabetic ordering is maintained for the other letters in the subset.
  • the distinction between the letter in cache and the rest of the letters can be further marked by selecting a different color, size, style, etc. of font for the cached letter than for the rest of the letters.
  • Figure 45 shows how the word "think” is entered without the use of a visual cache
  • figure 46 shows the same word entered using a visual cache.
  • the letter "t” is entered by first activating the first input means 2103 corresponding to the letter "t". Before the first input means is activated, the display as shown in the second column of the figure. Once 2103 is activated, the display changes to that shown in the third column. When the input means 2101 is then activated, the letter "t” is output. The displays change similarly as the other letters of the word "think" are entered.
  • the most-likely next letter changes as context is created by the entering of the word.
  • the letter selected to be cached should change as a word is entered, and will depend on which word is being entered.
  • Explicit disambiguation and inputting of additional symbols As has already been pointed out, it is generally desirable to provide a completely unambiguous method for inputting symbols in a typable device based on ambiguous codes.
  • one simple way to provide unambiguous input is by provision of an additional unambiguous input means 2105 shown in figure 41 in a position where it is easily activatable by the thumb, which is the preferred position. Other positions, however, could be chosen.
  • the disambiguation mechanism will always either choose the desired symbol correctly, or it will chose the other, incorrect, symbol to which it is paired.
  • Any disambiguation software could generate a signal to indicate which of the two symbols it would choose were the corresponding input means to be selected by the user. This signal could be used to provide feedback to the user, for instance by highlighting the letter to be chosen. If the letter to be chosen is not the desired letter, the user has the option of activating the explicit disambiguation input means 2105 shown in figure 41 to force the choice of the other, non- highlighted symbol.
  • FIG 47 An example use of this unambiguous text entry mechanism is shown in figure 47. As in figures 45 and 46, this figure shows how the word "think" is entered.
  • the fourth column gives the letter that would be output were the unambiguous input means 2105 to be activated after activation of the first and second input means used to enter the letters of the word "think” . For example, if input means 2103 and then input means 2101 had been activated to enter the letter "t", then further activation of input means 2105 would select the letter
  • Strong Touch Typability is a new, inventive concept describing a definite class of machines .
  • the breadth of this concept has been pointed out through a variety of embodiments placed near the boundaries of this class, and thus indicating its extent.
  • this section will present an alternative numerical characterization of strong touch typability which will allow the strong touch typability of any ambiguous code to be measured, and to thus decide if that code falls within the scope of this invention or not .
  • Key Number We need to define four kinds of key numbers: physical key number, chording key number, effective key number, and combined effective key number.
  • Physical key number the number of inputs used to encode symbols.
  • a minimal qwerty keyboard has 26 keys labeled with a letter, a shift key and a space key, it thus has a physical key number of 28.
  • Chording key number the number of distinct combinations of keys which encode symbols.
  • Effective key number Given a set of symbols to represent in an ambiguous code, a set of language statistics, and a number of physical keys, P, there exists an optimal ambiguous code which has the best possible lookup and query rates, given that these are the only constraints on the code. Let us call these rates Pi and Pq respectively. Any ambiguous code on any number of physical keys will have an effective key number of P if its lookup rates and query rates are equal to Pi and Pq. It is impossible for a keyboard with a physical number of keys less than P to support an ambiguous code with an effective key number equal to or greater than P. It is perfectly possible, and usually the case, that an ambiguous code on a physical number of keys P has an effective key number less than P.
  • English can be defined as strongly touch typable if its combined effective key number is at least 10. We can extend this definition to other languages by requiring that for a code to be strongly touch typable, it must have a lookup error rate and a query rate greater than or equal to those of a strongly touch typable code for English. Since the combined effective key number of the standard ambiguous code is less than 10, it is not strongly touch typable by the considerations of this section.
  • any ambiguous code can be screened for possession of the strong touch typability property.
  • the hybrid chording/ambiguous code: ab c df e gi h jk 1 o n pqr s uv t wxz y discussed above has 9 physical keys: the 8 letter keys of the standard telephone keypad plus 1 shift key. It has a chording key number of 16; it is equivalent to an ambiguous code on 16 independent keys with no shift key. Without application of a gap factor, its (lookup, query) rates are (431,21) corresponding to a combined effective key number of 12.8.
  • the one-handed hybrid chording/ ambiguous code embodiment has a code with (lookup, query) rates of (1100,69), yielding a combined effective key number of 15, though its physical key number is 4 and its chording key number is 16. It is a strongly touch typable code, and the difference between the chording key number and combined effective key number is due to the additional ergonomic constraint of alphabetic ordering of the first-level code. Taking into account this additional constraint, the code is substantially optimal.
  • the 14-physical key code of Fujitsu, pn gt cr zk wj a e hi so ud xf ym vl qb has (lookup, query) rates of (105,4), and a combined effective key number of 8.47.
  • This code is neither substantially optimal nor strongly touch typable, despite the fact that its physical number of keys is greater than 10.

Landscapes

  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
  • General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
  • Human Computer Interaction (AREA)
  • Signal Processing (AREA)
  • Computer Hardware Design (AREA)
  • Input From Keyboards Or The Like (AREA)
  • Accessory Devices And Overall Control Thereof (AREA)
  • Telephone Set Structure (AREA)

Abstract

La conception de dispositifs à frappe (6005), en particulier de dispositifs à frappe (6005) dont le fonctionnement est fondé sur des codes ambigus (6001), présente de nombreux problèmes sur le plan ergonomique. Des solutions apportées à ces problèmes sont ici décrites. L'invention offre des procédés de sélection de codes ambigus (6001) à partir de la classe des codes ambigus (6001) pour la frappe à toucher fort et des codes ambigus (6001) sensiblement optimaux pour des dispositifs à frappe à simple toucher tels que des ordinateurs, des téléphones, des récepteurs d'appels de personnes, des assistants numériques personnels, des cartes à puces, des décodeurs de télévision et d'autres appareils d'information, avec des contraintes de conception données telles que la taille, la forme et la capacité informatique du dispositif, les utilisations normales du dispositif, et avec des contraintes classiques telles que le respect de l'ordre alphabétique ou de la configuration QWERTY.
PCT/US1999/029343 1998-12-10 1999-12-09 Dispositifs a frappe a simple toucher dont le fonctionnement est fonde sur des codes ambigus, et procedes de conception de tels dispositifs WO2000035091A1 (fr)

Priority Applications (9)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US11/796,720 USRE43082E1 (en) 1998-12-10 1999-12-09 Touch-typable devices based on ambiguous codes and methods to design such devices
EP99964211A EP1145434A4 (fr) 1998-12-10 1999-12-09 Dispositifs a frappe a simple toucher dont le fonctionnement est fonde sur des codes ambigus, et procedes de conception de tels dispositifs
AU20499/00A AU760655B2 (en) 1998-12-10 1999-12-09 Touch-typable devices based on ambiguous codes and methods to design such devices
US09/856,863 US6885317B1 (en) 1998-12-10 1999-12-09 Touch-typable devices based on ambiguous codes and methods to design such devices
BR9916073-0A BR9916073A (pt) 1998-12-10 1999-12-09 Dispositivos de digitação às cegas baseados em códigos ambìguos e métodos para projetar estes dispositivos
CA002353862A CA2353862C (fr) 1998-12-10 1999-12-09 Dispositifs a frappe a simple toucher dont le fonctionnement est fonde sur des codes ambigus, et procedes de conception de tels dispositifs
JP2000587443A JP2002532792A (ja) 1998-12-10 1999-12-09 曖昧コードを基礎とするタッチタイプ装置およびそのような装置を設計する方法
EA200100629A EA004128B1 (ru) 1998-12-10 1999-12-09 Устройства с высоким разрешением печати вслепую, основанные на неоднозначных кодах, и способы разработки таких устройств
HK02102894.1A HK1041121B (zh) 1998-12-10 2002-04-17 依據歧異編碼及方法而設計的可鍵入裝置

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
US11166598P 1998-12-10 1998-12-10
US60/111,665 1998-12-10

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2000035091A1 true WO2000035091A1 (fr) 2000-06-15

Family

ID=22339788

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/US1999/029343 WO2000035091A1 (fr) 1998-12-10 1999-12-09 Dispositifs a frappe a simple toucher dont le fonctionnement est fonde sur des codes ambigus, et procedes de conception de tels dispositifs

Country Status (11)

Country Link
EP (1) EP1145434A4 (fr)
JP (2) JP2002532792A (fr)
KR (1) KR100776275B1 (fr)
CN (1) CN1218233C (fr)
AU (1) AU760655B2 (fr)
BR (1) BR9916073A (fr)
CA (1) CA2353862C (fr)
EA (1) EA004128B1 (fr)
HK (1) HK1041121B (fr)
WO (1) WO2000035091A1 (fr)
ZA (2) ZA200104511B (fr)

Cited By (26)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
EP1093058A1 (fr) * 1999-09-28 2001-04-18 Cloanto Corporation Procédé et appareil pour traitement de données de texte et de caractères
EP1332419A2 (fr) * 2000-09-27 2003-08-06 Eatoni Ergonomics, Inc. Procede et appareil d'entree acceleree de symboles sur un clavier reduit
FR2840488A1 (fr) * 2002-05-28 2003-12-05 Jean Loup Gillot Clavier pour telephone mobile
GB2394918A (en) * 2002-11-07 2004-05-12 Patrick John Naughton Keypad for an electronic device having characters arranged on keys in a non-alphabetic/non-QWERTY order
EP1497710A1 (fr) * 2002-04-04 2005-01-19 Xrgomics Pte. Ltd Systeme de clavier reduit emulant la cartographie et la dactylographie d'un clavier de type qwerty
EP1514357A1 (fr) * 2002-06-20 2005-03-16 America Online Incorporated Filtrage explicite de lettres d'une entree de texte ambigue
WO2006024159A1 (fr) * 2004-08-31 2006-03-09 Research In Motion Limited Dispositif electronique portatif fournissant une indication visuelle d'une routine d'entree et procede associe
WO2006024158A1 (fr) * 2004-08-31 2006-03-09 Research In Motion Limited Dispositif electronique portable avec desambiguisation de texte
WO2006024153A1 (fr) * 2004-08-31 2006-03-09 Research In Motion Limited Dispositif electronique a main a desambiguisation de texte
WO2006024157A1 (fr) * 2004-08-31 2006-03-09 Research In Motion Limited Dispositif electronique a main a desambiguisation de texte
US7475004B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2009-01-06 Research In Motion Limited Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
US7761175B2 (en) * 2001-09-27 2010-07-20 Eatoni Ergonomics, Inc. Method and apparatus for discoverable input of symbols on a reduced keypad
US7817140B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2010-10-19 Research In Motion Limited Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
EP2270629A3 (fr) * 2001-12-21 2011-06-15 Research In Motion Limited Appareil électronique portable avec clavier
US7973765B2 (en) 2004-06-21 2011-07-05 Research In Motion Limited Handheld wireless communication device
US8004495B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2011-08-23 Research In Motion Limited Handheld electronic device and associated method employing a multiple-axis input device and outputting a currently selected variant at a text input location during text disambiguation
EP2498190A2 (fr) 2003-09-19 2012-09-12 Tegic Communications, Inc. Prévision contextuelle de mots d'utilisateur et actions de l'utilisateur
EP2128749A3 (fr) * 2008-05-27 2012-09-26 NTT DoCoMo, Inc. Terminal mobile et procédé d'affichage d'informations
US8576173B2 (en) 2002-07-04 2013-11-05 Koninklijke Philips N. V. Automatically adaptable virtual keyboard
US8726148B1 (en) 1999-09-28 2014-05-13 Cloanto Corporation Method and apparatus for processing text and character data
US8938688B2 (en) 1998-12-04 2015-01-20 Nuance Communications, Inc. Contextual prediction of user words and user actions
US9786273B2 (en) 2004-06-02 2017-10-10 Nuance Communications, Inc. Multimodal disambiguation of speech recognition
CN109032374A (zh) * 2017-06-09 2018-12-18 北京搜狗科技发展有限公司 一种用于输入法的候选展示方法、装置、介质及设备
US10254953B2 (en) 2013-01-21 2019-04-09 Keypoint Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Text input method using continuous trace across two or more clusters of candidate words to select two or more words to form a sequence, wherein the candidate words are arranged based on selection probabilities
US10296085B2 (en) 2014-03-05 2019-05-21 Markantus Ag Relatively simple and inexpensive finger operated control device including piezoelectric sensors for gesture input, and method thereof
US10474355B2 (en) 2013-01-21 2019-11-12 Keypoint Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Input pattern detection over virtual keyboard for candidate word identification

Families Citing this family (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
EP1611735A1 (fr) * 2003-03-17 2006-01-04 Jaewoo Ahn Arrangements de caracteres, procedes d'entree et dispositif d'entree
US8200865B2 (en) 2003-09-11 2012-06-12 Eatoni Ergonomics, Inc. Efficient method and apparatus for text entry based on trigger sequences
EP2069891A2 (fr) 2006-09-14 2009-06-17 Eatoni Ergonomics, Inc. Rangées de claviers similaires à celle d'un clavier de téléphone
DE102007004959A1 (de) 2007-01-26 2008-08-07 Vodafone Holding Gmbh Betrieb eines in Telekommunikationsnetzen nutzbaren Endgerätes
EP2400373A1 (fr) 2010-06-22 2011-12-28 Vodafone Holding GmbH Saisie de symboles dans un dispositif électronique doté d'un écran tactile
EP2400372B1 (fr) 2010-06-22 2017-11-15 Vodafone Holding GmbH Saisie de symboles dans un dispositif électronique doté d'un écran tactile

Citations (7)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4791556A (en) * 1984-08-29 1988-12-13 Vilkaitis John V Method for operating a computer which searches for operational symbols and executes functions corresponding to the operational symbols in response to user inputted signal
US4868750A (en) * 1987-10-07 1989-09-19 Houghton Mifflin Company Collocational grammar system
US5642522A (en) * 1993-08-03 1997-06-24 Xerox Corporation Context-sensitive method of finding information about a word in an electronic dictionary
US5675819A (en) * 1994-06-16 1997-10-07 Xerox Corporation Document information retrieval using global word co-occurrence patterns
US5818437A (en) * 1995-07-26 1998-10-06 Tegic Communications, Inc. Reduced keyboard disambiguating computer
US5847697A (en) * 1995-01-31 1998-12-08 Fujitsu Limited Single-handed keyboard having keys with multiple characters and character ambiguity resolution logic
US6011554A (en) * 1995-07-26 2000-01-04 Tegic Communications, Inc. Reduced keyboard disambiguating system

Family Cites Families (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US5175803A (en) * 1985-06-14 1992-12-29 Yeh Victor C Method and apparatus for data processing and word processing in Chinese using a phonetic Chinese language

Patent Citations (7)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US4791556A (en) * 1984-08-29 1988-12-13 Vilkaitis John V Method for operating a computer which searches for operational symbols and executes functions corresponding to the operational symbols in response to user inputted signal
US4868750A (en) * 1987-10-07 1989-09-19 Houghton Mifflin Company Collocational grammar system
US5642522A (en) * 1993-08-03 1997-06-24 Xerox Corporation Context-sensitive method of finding information about a word in an electronic dictionary
US5675819A (en) * 1994-06-16 1997-10-07 Xerox Corporation Document information retrieval using global word co-occurrence patterns
US5847697A (en) * 1995-01-31 1998-12-08 Fujitsu Limited Single-handed keyboard having keys with multiple characters and character ambiguity resolution logic
US5818437A (en) * 1995-07-26 1998-10-06 Tegic Communications, Inc. Reduced keyboard disambiguating computer
US6011554A (en) * 1995-07-26 2000-01-04 Tegic Communications, Inc. Reduced keyboard disambiguating system

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
See also references of EP1145434A4 *

Cited By (47)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US9626355B2 (en) 1998-12-04 2017-04-18 Nuance Communications, Inc. Contextual prediction of user words and user actions
US8938688B2 (en) 1998-12-04 2015-01-20 Nuance Communications, Inc. Contextual prediction of user words and user actions
EP1093058A1 (fr) * 1999-09-28 2001-04-18 Cloanto Corporation Procédé et appareil pour traitement de données de texte et de caractères
US8726148B1 (en) 1999-09-28 2014-05-13 Cloanto Corporation Method and apparatus for processing text and character data
US8990738B2 (en) 1999-12-03 2015-03-24 Nuance Communications, Inc. Explicit character filtering of ambiguous text entry
US8972905B2 (en) 1999-12-03 2015-03-03 Nuance Communications, Inc. Explicit character filtering of ambiguous text entry
EP1332419A4 (fr) * 2000-09-27 2006-09-06 Eatoni Ergonomics Inc Procede et appareil d'entree acceleree de symboles sur un clavier reduit
EP1332419A2 (fr) * 2000-09-27 2003-08-06 Eatoni Ergonomics, Inc. Procede et appareil d'entree acceleree de symboles sur un clavier reduit
US7761175B2 (en) * 2001-09-27 2010-07-20 Eatoni Ergonomics, Inc. Method and apparatus for discoverable input of symbols on a reduced keypad
US8098814B2 (en) 2001-12-21 2012-01-17 Research In Motion Limited Handheld electronic device with keyboard
EP1459499B1 (fr) * 2001-12-21 2011-10-12 Research In Motion Limited Dispositif electronique de poche pourvu d'un clavier
EP2270629A3 (fr) * 2001-12-21 2011-06-15 Research In Motion Limited Appareil électronique portable avec clavier
EP1497710A4 (fr) * 2002-04-04 2007-06-13 Xrgomics Pte Ltd Systeme de clavier reduit emulant la cartographie et la dactylographie d'un clavier de type qwerty
EP1497710A1 (fr) * 2002-04-04 2005-01-19 Xrgomics Pte. Ltd Systeme de clavier reduit emulant la cartographie et la dactylographie d'un clavier de type qwerty
FR2840488A1 (fr) * 2002-05-28 2003-12-05 Jean Loup Gillot Clavier pour telephone mobile
EP1514357A1 (fr) * 2002-06-20 2005-03-16 America Online Incorporated Filtrage explicite de lettres d'une entree de texte ambigue
EP1514357A4 (fr) * 2002-06-20 2006-08-23 America Online Inc Filtrage explicite de lettres d'une entree de texte ambigue
US8576173B2 (en) 2002-07-04 2013-11-05 Koninklijke Philips N. V. Automatically adaptable virtual keyboard
GB2394918A (en) * 2002-11-07 2004-05-12 Patrick John Naughton Keypad for an electronic device having characters arranged on keys in a non-alphabetic/non-QWERTY order
EP2498190A2 (fr) 2003-09-19 2012-09-12 Tegic Communications, Inc. Prévision contextuelle de mots d'utilisateur et actions de l'utilisateur
US9786273B2 (en) 2004-06-02 2017-10-10 Nuance Communications, Inc. Multimodal disambiguation of speech recognition
US7973765B2 (en) 2004-06-21 2011-07-05 Research In Motion Limited Handheld wireless communication device
US8502783B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2013-08-06 Research In Motion Limited Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
GB2434681A (en) * 2004-08-31 2007-08-01 Research In Motion Ltd Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
US7817140B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2010-10-19 Research In Motion Limited Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
US8004495B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2011-08-23 Research In Motion Limited Handheld electronic device and associated method employing a multiple-axis input device and outputting a currently selected variant at a text input location during text disambiguation
WO2006024159A1 (fr) * 2004-08-31 2006-03-09 Research In Motion Limited Dispositif electronique portatif fournissant une indication visuelle d'une routine d'entree et procede associe
GB2432952A (en) * 2004-08-31 2007-06-06 Research In Motion Ltd Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
GB2432952B (en) * 2004-08-31 2010-06-02 Ontario Inc 2012244 Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
GB2432953A (en) * 2004-08-31 2007-06-06 Research In Motion Ltd Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
US8489383B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2013-07-16 Research In Motion Limited Text disambiguation in a handheld electronic device with capital and lower case letters of prefix objects
GB2434237A (en) * 2004-08-31 2007-07-18 Research In Motion Ltd Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
GB2434237B (en) * 2004-08-31 2010-01-06 Ontario Inc 2012244 Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
GB2432953B (en) * 2004-08-31 2009-03-25 Ontario Inc 2012244 Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
US8768685B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2014-07-01 Blackberry Limited Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
WO2006024157A1 (fr) * 2004-08-31 2006-03-09 Research In Motion Limited Dispositif electronique a main a desambiguisation de texte
US7475004B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2009-01-06 Research In Motion Limited Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
WO2006024158A1 (fr) * 2004-08-31 2006-03-09 Research In Motion Limited Dispositif electronique portable avec desambiguisation de texte
US9189080B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2015-11-17 Blackberry Limited Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
US9588596B2 (en) 2004-08-31 2017-03-07 Blackberry Limited Handheld electronic device with text disambiguation
WO2006024153A1 (fr) * 2004-08-31 2006-03-09 Research In Motion Limited Dispositif electronique a main a desambiguisation de texte
EP2128749A3 (fr) * 2008-05-27 2012-09-26 NTT DoCoMo, Inc. Terminal mobile et procédé d'affichage d'informations
US10254953B2 (en) 2013-01-21 2019-04-09 Keypoint Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Text input method using continuous trace across two or more clusters of candidate words to select two or more words to form a sequence, wherein the candidate words are arranged based on selection probabilities
US10474355B2 (en) 2013-01-21 2019-11-12 Keypoint Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. Input pattern detection over virtual keyboard for candidate word identification
US10296085B2 (en) 2014-03-05 2019-05-21 Markantus Ag Relatively simple and inexpensive finger operated control device including piezoelectric sensors for gesture input, and method thereof
CN109032374A (zh) * 2017-06-09 2018-12-18 北京搜狗科技发展有限公司 一种用于输入法的候选展示方法、装置、介质及设备
CN109032374B (zh) * 2017-06-09 2023-06-20 北京搜狗科技发展有限公司 一种用于输入法的候选展示方法、装置、介质及设备

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
EP1145434A4 (fr) 2006-06-28
ZA200104509B (en) 2002-09-02
KR100776275B1 (ko) 2007-11-13
CN1330810A (zh) 2002-01-09
JP2002532792A (ja) 2002-10-02
AU760655B2 (en) 2003-05-22
EA200100629A1 (ru) 2001-12-24
CA2353862C (fr) 2007-11-13
BR9916073A (pt) 2001-09-04
AU2049900A (en) 2000-06-26
CN1218233C (zh) 2005-09-07
ZA200104511B (en) 2002-09-02
HK1041121A1 (en) 2002-06-28
KR20010093812A (ko) 2001-10-29
CA2353862A1 (fr) 2000-06-15
EA004128B1 (ru) 2003-12-25
JP2010152925A (ja) 2010-07-08
HK1041121B (zh) 2006-02-03
EP1145434A1 (fr) 2001-10-17

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US6885317B1 (en) Touch-typable devices based on ambiguous codes and methods to design such devices
AU760655B2 (en) Touch-typable devices based on ambiguous codes and methods to design such devices
US5953541A (en) Disambiguating system for disambiguating ambiguous input sequences by displaying objects associated with the generated input sequences in the order of decreasing frequency of use
US6011554A (en) Reduced keyboard disambiguating system
US5818437A (en) Reduced keyboard disambiguating computer
CA2601305C (fr) Interfaces etre humain-dispositif mobile
CA2601303C (fr) Interfaces homme-mobile
JP2002532792A5 (fr)
WO1998033111A9 (fr) Systeme permettant d'eliminer les ambiguites des claviers reduits
KR20060134118A (ko) 인간 대 컴퓨터 인터페이스
JP2005521969A (ja) Ｑｗｅｒｔｙ型マッピングおよびタイピングをエミュレートする縮小キーボード・システム
WO1997005541A9 (fr) Systeme d'elimination des ambiguites d'un clavier reduit
KR20000035960A (ko) 고속 타자 장치와 방법
CA2601859A1 (fr) Dispositifs a frappe a simple toucher dont le fonctionnement est fonde sur des codes ambigus, et procedes de conception de tels dispositifs
KR100470525B1 (ko) Ｏｈａｉ기술의 사용자 인터페이스
MXPA01005887A (en) Touch-typable devices based on ambiguous codes and methods to design such devices
AU747901B2 (en) Reduced keyboard disambiguating system

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 99814191.7

Country of ref document: CN

AK Designated states

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): AE AL AM AT AU AZ BA BB BG BR BY CA CH CN CU CZ DE DK EE ES FI GB GD GE GH GM HR HU ID IL IN IS JP KE KG KP KR KZ LC LK LR LS LT LU LV MD MG MK MN MW MX NO NZ PL PT RO RU SD SE SG SI SK SL TJ TM TR TT UA UG US UZ VN YU ZA ZW

AL Designated countries for regional patents

Kind code of ref document: A1

Designated state(s): GH GM KE LS MW SD SL SZ TZ UG ZW AM AZ BY KG KZ MD RU TJ TM AT BE CH CY DE DK ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LU MC NL PT SE BF BJ CF CG CI CM GA GN GW ML MR NE SN TD TG

121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application
DFPE Request for preliminary examination filed prior to expiration of 19th month from priority date (pct application filed before 20040101)
WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 11796720

Country of ref document: US

Ref document number: 09856863

Country of ref document: US

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 2001/04509

Country of ref document: ZA

Ref document number: 200104509

Country of ref document: ZA

ENP Entry into the national phase

Ref document number: 2353862

Country of ref document: CA

Ref document number: 2353862

Country of ref document: CA

Kind code of ref document: A

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: PA/a/2001/005887

Country of ref document: MX

Ref document number: IN/PCT/2001/611/KOL

Country of ref document: IN

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 1020017007214

Country of ref document: KR

ENP Entry into the national phase

Ref document number: 2000 587443

Country of ref document: JP

Kind code of ref document: A

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 20499/00

Country of ref document: AU

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 1999964211

Country of ref document: EP

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 200100629

Country of ref document: EA

REG Reference to national code

Ref country code: DE

Ref legal event code: 8642

WWP Wipo information: published in national office

Ref document number: 1999964211

Country of ref document: EP

WWP Wipo information: published in national office

Ref document number: 1020017007214

Country of ref document: KR

WWG Wipo information: grant in national office

Ref document number: 20499/00

Country of ref document: AU