Low-Latency Subsystem Cross-Control Input Processing

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current user input systems suffer from high latency issues, which negatively impact the user experience by introducing delays between user input and system response, making it difficult to provide immediate and seamless interactions, especially in direct manipulation interfaces.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of a hybrid system that combines low-latency and high-latency responses, utilizing a dedicated processing system with a low-latency input sensor and display, and incorporating a custom-programmed FPGA or ASIC to reduce latency to near-instantaneous levels, while maintaining traditional OS and computing hardware for higher latency responses.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Loss of time

If a traditional OS and computing hardware are used for processing user input, then the system maintains general-purpose functionality and adaptability, but the control response latency increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecontrol response latencyVSAvoidsystem architecture complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Loss of timeVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system is divided into two independent subsystems: a low-latency subsystem handling time-critical user input processing, and a high-level OS subsystem handling general-purpose operations. This segmentation allows each subsystem to be optimized for its specific function without compromising the other, directly reducing control response latency while maintaining overall system functionality.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

A dedicated input sensor acts as an intermediary between the user input device and the low-latency subsystem, preprocessing input signals and filtering out non-critical data before transmission. This intermediary role reduces the processing burden on the low-latency subsystem, enabling faster response times without increasing overall system complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Ease of operation

If a dedicated low-latency processing system is implemented, then the user interaction responsiveness improves, but the device complexity and development difficulty increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveuser interaction responsivenessVSAvoiddevelopment and implementation difficulty

Core Design Contradiction:

Ease of operationVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces complex mechanical processing systems with a streamlined electronic architecture where the low-latency subsystem uses simplified logic circuits and state machines instead of general-purpose processors. This substitution reduces development complexity while maintaining fast response times, making the system easier to manufacture.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The low-latency subsystem is pre-configured with predetermined response behaviors and lookup tables for common user inputs. This preliminary preparation eliminates the need for complex real-time decision-making logic, simplifying both development and implementation while ensuring consistently fast user interaction responsiveness.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

3Productivity

If only low-latency processing is used, then the user experience is immediate and seamless, but the system loses the ability to handle complex application logic and traditional OS functions

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveuser interaction efficiencyVSAvoidsystem functionality range

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The system operates in two temporal dimensions simultaneously: the low-latency subsystem handles immediate user interactions with millisecond response times, while the high-level OS subsystem processes complex application logic with longer time scales. This multi-dimensional time handling allows the system to maintain both immediate responsiveness and full functional versatility without compromise.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

Solution Approach 2:

The two subsystems exchange feedback information continuously: the low-latency subsystem provides real-time state information to the OS subsystem, and the OS subsystem communicates higher-level command intentions back to the low-latency subsystem. This feedback mechanism ensures coordinated operation, allowing complex application logic to be executed while maintaining fast user interaction efficiency.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS9830014B2Reducing control response latency with defined cross-control behavior

Publication Date: 2017.11.28 TACTUAL LABS IP LLC

AI summary

In an embodiment, a system for processing user input on a device is disclosed which includes a low-latency subsystem (LLS) adapted to receive signals from an input subsystem and to selectively forward the signals to a conventional software stack. The subsystem is adapted to generate a low-latency response in response to one or more of the signals and the signals received by the subsystem comprise an input which triggers a cross-control behavior that inhibits forwarding of at least some of the signals to the conventional software stack. In another embodiment, a system for processing user input having an input subsystem is disclosed. A LLS is adapted to receive signals from the input subsystem and to generate a low-latency response in response to one or more of the signals, and to send at least one of the signals to a regular output subsystem. The LLS is configured to identify the cross-control behavior and generate a response reflecting the behavior.