On August 3, 2010 I wrote that my first paper reached exactly 100 citations on Google Scholar. Now my second publication, a UIST 2004 paper, has exactly 100 citations as well. Coincidently, we will host UIST 2013 in St Andrews next year.
Archive for the ‘acm’ Category
Dr Shumin Zhai, my former PhD advisor, has been named an ACM Fellow “for contributions to human-computer interface research and innovation”!
I am programming in Objective-C right now. It is an interesting programming language, essentially a smaller and simpler alternative to C++. However, unlike C++, Objective-C is a strict superset of ANSI C, which means any valid C code can be compiled by an Objective-C compiler, something that a C++ compiler cannot guarantee (for instance, the need to cast void-pointers is different in C and C++).
What Objective-C does is add additional well-needed abstractions to ANSI C, such as classes, interfaces and inheritance. I have to admit, coming from mostly C and Java programming, I was initially annoyed by the Smalltalk-inspired syntax (and I’m still not convinced it makes any sense).
However, I am starting to think that Objective-C might be a good teaching language for an ambitious programming class. Unlike Java and C++, Objective-C’s syntax clearly differentiates between standard function calls and instance method invocations (message expressions). The syntax also differentiates between method declarations and function declarations.
The theory is that by having distinct syntax for these and other aspects of the programming language the learner is forced to conceptualize the differences. Syntax is enforced by the compiler and conceptual misunderstandings will lead to compilation errors that the learner has to correct. In other words, conceptual misunderstandings are explicitly pointed out to the learner by the compiler. If the learner does not satisfy the compiler the program won’t compile, let alone run. For example, the Objective-C syntax makes it impossible to call an instance method and not realize that this is message passing and not a static function invocation.
Another potential advantage of using Objective-C as a teaching language is that it is somewhere in the middle between Java and C++. It is closer to the hardware than Java. For instance, when an object is created in Objective-C, the idiom is to first explicitly allocate memory for it and thereafter initialize it (e.g. the expression UIButton *button = [[UIButton alloc] init]; first allocates memory for a structure to represent the button, and then initializes it). This first step of allocation and memory management is hidden for Java programmers. However, computer science students obviously need to understand memory management. Yet Objective-C is not as convoluted as C++. For instance, it doesn’t have operator overloading, templates and multiple inheritance. Hence it is not too daunting for the beginning programmer.
I just noticed that according to Google Scholar my first publication, a CHI 2003 paper, has exactly 100 citations now. It seems to be my most cited paper so far.
A recent paper by Gonzalo Génova in the Communications of the ACM talks about the role of empirical evidence in evaluating computer science research. The article talks about computer science in general but it reminds me of Henry Lieberman’s 2003 paper The Tyranny of Evaluation, which attacks the tendency in HCI to reject papers describing groundbreaking systems and techniques solely due to their lack of empirical evidence. Henry makes a comparison to Galileo’s experiments of dropping balls from the Tower of Pisa. As he eloquently puts it: “Trouble is, people aren’t balls.“
In this month’s issue of Communications of the ACM there is a paper that shows that selective ACM conference papers are on par, or better than, journal articles in terms of citation counts.
From the paper:
“First and foremost, computing researchers are right to view conferences as an important archival venue and use acceptance rate as an indicator of future impact. Papers in highly selective conferences—acceptance rates of 30% or less—should continue to be treated as first-class research contributions with impact comparable to, or better than, journal papers.”
Considering that the authors only compared these conference papers against the top-tier journals (ACM Transactions), their finding is surprisingly strong. It also strengthens my view that in computer science, selective conference papers are as good, if not better, than journal articles.
From the website, this is what the CHI Academy is about:
“The CHI Academy is an honorary group of individuals who have made extensive contributions to the study of HCI and who have led the shaping of the field.”
Also from the website, this is the citation:
“Shumin Zhai is a Research Staff Member at the IBM Almaden Research Center. Shumin is a leading researcher in applying quantitative and engineering methods in HCI, and has made fundamental contributions to text entry optimization, physical input device design, eye-tracking interfaces, and the understanding of human performance. His contributions to text entry techniques for mobile and touch screen devices include the ShapeWriter gesture keyboard which has been commercialized. Shumin has also been a visiting professor at universities in Europe and China. He has served on many editorial boards and conference committees and is currently the Editor-in-Chief of ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction.”