Force Sensing for Inadvertent Input Control

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Inadvertent touch inputs on devices such as trackpads and touchscreens can interfere with user experiences, causing unintended selections, cursor movement, and gestures, leading to frustration, especially due to fatigue or accidental contact.

Innovation Solution

The use of force detection techniques to differentiate between intended and unintended inputs by analyzing force waveforms, cursor stability methods to maintain cursor position through force measurement, and the employment of n-manifolds in a product space of contact size and signal strength to determine the likelihood of force application, allowing for the differentiation between hovering and intentional contacts.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If touch sensitivity is increased to improve user interaction responsiveness, then ease of operation is improved, but inadvertent inputs increase leading to reduced reliability

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetouch responsivenessVSAvoidinput accuracy
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes the parameter being measured from simple touch presence to force magnitude. By measuring the magnitude of force applied and comparing it against thresholds, the system can distinguish between intentional inputs (higher force) and inadvertent inputs (lower force), thereby maintaining high touch responsiveness while improving input accuracy

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces force magnitude as an intermediary parameter between touch detection and input recognition. Instead of directly converting touch presence into input actions, the system uses force magnitude measurement as an intermediate step to filter and classify touches, enabling differentiation between deliberate and accidental contacts

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Ease of operation

If force detection thresholds are lowered to detect lighter intentional inputs, then ease of operation is improved, but inadvertent inputs from hovering or fatigue increase leading to reduced reliability

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinput detection sensitivityVSAvoidfalse input rate
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent changes from binary touch detection to continuous force magnitude measurement. This allows the system to detect subtle intentional inputs while maintaining the ability to distinguish them from hovering or fatigue-induced contacts through force threshold comparison, rather than relying on a single sensitivity threshold

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary force measurement and classification before registering an input. By evaluating force magnitude upfront, the system can preemptively filter out inadvertent inputs that would otherwise be registered as valid commands, preventing false inputs before they occur

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Ease of operation

If cursor movement sensitivity is increased to improve responsiveness, then ease of operation is improved, but cursor stability during press or lift-off deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecursor responsivenessVSAvoidcursor position stability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses force magnitude as a dynamic parameter to control cursor behavior. During press down or lift off, when force changes are detected, the system can temporarily adjust cursor movement characteristics or freeze cursor position, using force as a control parameter to maintain stability while preserving normal responsiveness during stable contact

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

4Ease of manufacture

If traditional touch detection methods are used to maintain simple device complexity, then ease of manufacture is improved, but ability to distinguish inadvertent inputs deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedevice simplicityVSAvoidinput differentiation capability
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent makes the existing force sensing capability serve multiple functions: both measuring force magnitude for input classification and providing cursor control information. This multi-functionality allows the system to distinguish inadvertent inputs without adding separate dedicated components, maintaining device simplicity while improving reliability

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentEP3304268B1Force sensing and inadvertent input control
Publication Date: 2019.11.13 MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY LICENSING LLC
  • EP3304268B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3304268B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP3304268B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

Inadvertent input control techniques are described. In one or more implementations, techniques are described that leverage force to determine a likelihood that a user intended to provide an input, e.g., a selection input (e.g., a "click"), gesture, lift off, and so forth. This is usable to identify taps, hovers, continuation of movement of a drag operation, and so on. Implementations are also discussed that leverage an n-manifold in the product space of contact size and signal strength that is usable to define a likelihood of whether a contact includes an application of force. A variety of other examples are also described, including cursor stability techniques that leverage force in order to control movement of a cursor.