The theoretical evaluation of the thesis work starts with by assessing in which measure the research questions were answered by the proposed concept. Then, the analysis will focus on the comparison of the implemented prototype’s features with the ones presented in Related work, in order to see which ones were implemented and how the prototype’s features map on the array of desired ones. Finally, this chapter will conclude with a matrix in which the implemented functional requirement are marked, giving a final overview on the capabilities of the prototype to fulfill all the requirements stated in Requirement elicitation.
The section Concept – Solution approach gave a possible solution to the research questions, proposing several answers to them. In this section, the paper will analyze them in the context of the prototype’s implementation.
- Additional features to improve the usability of a brainstorming supporting application;
- Input devices / mechanisms to register ideas into the system;
- Post brainstorming organization of ideas
- Mechanisms to support the brainstorming session;
- Is the brainstorming session result used by other systems?
- Solutions to address the physical limitation of the tabletop.
The next table presents the analysis of the prototype’s features against the desired feature matrix in which all related tabletop applications which support brainstorming were already analyzed.
|
|
Reviewed systems |
|
|||||
|
Questions |
Breyn |
Touch & Write / LeCoOnt |
Pond |
WeSearch |
Docubits and Containers |
APDT |
Prototype – Breiny |
| Organization of ideas |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Partially |
Yes |
| Relating ideas |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
| Saving session |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
| Resuming session |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
No |
N/A |
Yes |
| Supports other input devices |
No |
Yes |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
| Helpers for idea generation |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
| Integration with other applications |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
Yes |
| Physical limitation addressed |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
No |
Yes |
As the above table presents, the implemented prototype achieves all the proposed goals, while the best system (Touch & Write / LeCoOnt) scores only 62.5% of the desired features. As opposed with Touch & Write, the addition of helpers allows easy fresh ideas and inspiration during the Brainstorming process. The integration with other applications, another feature that only this prototype implements, allows easy share of the Brainstorming session with other scientists and researchers. Addressing physical limitation is another unique feature that this application brings, affording bigger teams of researcher to brainstorm at the same time.
The functional requirements proposed by this thesis for the developed prototype ensure that all the features that make this unique will be implemented. As it can be observed from the following table, all of them are present in the prototype.
| Description |
Implemented |
|
| FR.1 | The system will allow multiple users to interact with the system simultaneously |
Yes |
| FR.2 | The system will allow multiple devices to interact with the Microsoft Surface simultaneously |
Yes |
| FR.3 | The users will be able to send ideas to the tabletop using mobile clients |
Yes |
| FR.4 | The users will be able to generate and input ideas in the system |
Yes |
| FR.5 | The Contributors will be able to input Brainstorming items directly on the tabletop |
Yes |
| FR.6 | The Contributors will be able to Group Brainstorming items |
Yes |
| FR.7 | The Contributors will be able to Edit Brainstorming items |
Yes |
| FR.8 | The Contributors will be able to Relate Brainstorming items |
Yes |
| FR.9 | The Contributors will be able to Print Screen |
Yes |
| FR.10 | The Contributors will be able to promote Twitter or Flickr items to Brainstorming items |
Yes |
| FR.11 | The Session Master will be able to login into its BSCW system |
Yes |
| FR.12 | The Session Master will be able to Save a Brainstorming Session |
Yes |
| FR.13 | The Session Master will be able to Load a Brainstorming Session |
Yes |
| FR.14 | The Session Master will be able to set Session Goal |
Yes |
| FR.15 | The Session Master will be able to start the application using his Tag |
Yes |
| FR.16 | The Session Master will be able to search on Flickr using a keyword |
Yes |
| FR.17 | The Session Master will be able to search on Twitter using a keyword |
Yes |
The theoretical evaluation parts conclude with few observations: the prototype has all desired capabilities to improve the Brainstorming process as the feature matrix was fully checked. It can prove to be much more useful than the compared systems, having almost twice the features that the average. The concept combines almost all useful features of electronic cooperation and collaboration, sharing and persistence, interlinking with other social and research systems and mobile devices.
