Enabling gaze interaction in real-time on handheld mobile devices has attracted significant attention in recent years. An increasing number of research projects have focused on sophisticated appearance-based deep learning models to enhance the precision of gaze estimation on smartphones. This inspires important research questions, including how the gaze can be used in a real-time application, and what type of gaze interaction methods are preferable under dynamic conditions in terms of both user acceptance and delivering reliable performance. To address these questions, we design four types of gaze scrolling techniques: three explicit technique based on Gaze Gesture, Dwell time, and Pursuit; and one implicit technique based on reading speed to support touch-free, page-scrolling on a reading application. We conduct a 20-participant user study under both sitting and walking settings and our results reveal that Gaze Gesture and Dwell time-based interfaces are more robust while walking and Gaze Gesture has achieved consistently good scores on usability while not causing high cognitive workload.

In this paper, we present Demystify, a general tool for creating human-interpretable step-by-step explanations of how to solve a wide range of pen and paper puzzles from a high-level logical description. Demystify is based on Minimal Unsatisfiable Subsets (MUSes), which allow Demystify to solve puzzles as a series of logical deductions by identifying which parts of the puzzle are required to progress. This paper makes three contributions over previous work. First, we provide a generic input language, based on the Essence constraint language, which allows us to easily use MUSes to solve a much wider range of pen and paper puzzles. Second, we demonstrate that the explanations that Demystify produces match those provided by humans by comparing our results with those provided independently by puzzle experts on a range of puzzles. We compare Demystify to published guides for solving a range of different pen and paper puzzles and show that by using MUSes, Demystify produces solving strategies which closely match human-produced guides to solving those same puzzles (on average 89% of the time). Finally, we introduce a new randomised algorithm to find MUSes for more difficult puzzles. This algorithm is focused on optimised search for individual small MUSes.

Problems such as timetabling or personnel allocation can be modeled and solved using discrete constraint programming languages. However, while existing constraint solving software solves such problems quickly in many cases, these systems involve specialized languages that require significant time and effort to learn and apply. These languages are typically text-based and often difficult to interpret and understand quickly, especially for people without engineering or mathematics backgrounds. Visualization could provide an alternative way to model and understand such problems. Although many visual programming languages exist for procedural languages, visual encoding of problem specifications has not received much attention. Future problem visualization languages could represent problem elements and their constraints unambiguously, but without unnecessary cognitive burdens for those needing to translate their problem's mental representation into diagrams. As a first step towards such languages, we executed a study that catalogs how people represent constraint problems graphically. We studied three groups with different expertise: non-computer scientists, computer scientists and constraint programmers and analyzed their marks on paper (e.g., arrows), gestures (e.g., pointing) and the mappings to problem concepts (e.g., containers, sets). We provide foundations to guide future tool designs allowing people to effectively grasp, model and solve problems through visual representations.