You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a touch panel system provided with a projection type touch panel system using an electrostatic capacitance system, an electronic information device provided with the touch panel system, and a method for detecting an indicator position by use of the touch panel.
2. Description of the Related Art
In recent years, a touch panel system for detecting a position of an indicator (for example, a finger of a user, or a touch pen; the same shall apply hereinafter) that is in contact with or close to a detecting surface of a touch panel to accept an instruction of the user is often provided on an electronic information device such as a portable telephone or a display apparatus. Especially, a projection type touch panel using an electrostatic capacitance system, which enables a multi-touch, has often been mounted on an electronic information device.
The projection type touch panel system using the electrostatic capacitance system includes a touch panel having a plurality of drive lines provided along a detecting surface so as to be parallel to each other, and a plurality of sense lines provided along the detecting surface so as to be parallel to each other and so as to cross the drive lines. In the touch panel system described above, when an electric signal (hereinafter referred to as a drive signal) is applied to the drive lines, an electric signal (hereinafter referred to as a sense signal) according to a capacity formed by the drive lines and the sense lines is generated on the sense lines. When this sense lines are acquired and processed, an in-plane distribution of the capacity can be obtained. A region where the capacitance is reduced due to an indicator being in contact with or close to the detecting surface is detected from the obtained in-plane distribution of the capacitance. The position of the indicator that is in contact with or close to the detecting surface is detected based on this region.
In the touch panel system described above, even if there are a plurality of indicators on the detecting surface, the position of each indicator can be detected only by detecting the region where the capacitance is reduced based on the obtained in-plane distribution of the capacitance. However, when a finger is in contact with the detecting surface, for example, noise might be caused along the sense lines on the region where the finger is in contact, in the obtained in-plane distribution of the capacitance, resulting in that a detection accuracy of the indicator might be deteriorated. This becomes a problem.
When a plurality of users simultaneously operate the touch panel (especially, when a plurality of users operate the touch panel by using different indicators), such as when a touch panel system is applied to a large-sized display device, for example, the problem caused by the deterioration in the detection accuracy of the indicator due to the noise becomes noticeable.
The specific example of this problem will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 11 is a graph illustrating an in-plane distribution of a capacitance obtained when a finger is in contact with a detecting surface in a conventional touch panel system. FIG. 12 is a graph illustrating an in-plane distribution of a capacitance obtained when a finger and a touch pen are in contact with the detecting surface in the conventional touch panel system. The lower graph in FIG. 11 illustrates the enlarged upper graph in FIG. 11. Similarly, the lower graph in FIG. 12 illustrates the enlarged upper graph in FIG. 12. The graphs in FIGS. 11 and 12 illustrate that a capacitance of a region where no object is present on the detecting surface is defined as a reference, and a region having a capacitance smaller than the reference capacitance projects upward.
As illustrated in FIG. 11, when a finger is in contact with the detecting surface, the capacitance of the region where the finger is in contact is decreased. However, noise is caused along the sense lines passing through the region where the finger is in contact in the obtained in-plane distribution of the capacitance.
In FIG. 11, the noise is sufficiently smaller than the decrease amount of the capacitance of the region where the finger is in contact. Therefore, in FIG. 11, the position where the finger is in contact can be detected in distinction from the noise.
On the other hand, as illustrated in FIG. 12, the decrease amount of the capacitance in the region where the touch pen is in contact is smaller than the decrease amount of the capacitance in the region where the finger is in contact. The noise can be larger than the decrease amount of the capacitance in the region where the touch pen is in contact. This is because a tip end of the touch pen is made narrow (e.g., about 1 mm to 4 mm) in order to enhance usability of the touch pen. Accordingly, when the touch pen is in contact with the sense lines passing through the region where the finger is in contact as illustrated in FIG. 12, it is difficult to distinguish the decrease amount of the capacitance in the region where the touch pen is in contact from the noise, because the decrease amount of the capacitance is buried in the noise. Therefore, the accuracy in detecting the position where the touch pen is in contact is deteriorated.
Japanese Laid-Open Patent Publication No. 2012-22543 discloses a touch panel system that detects positions of a plurality of indicators (electronic pen or finger) that are in contact with a detecting surface. The touch panel system recognizes an identification signal outputted from the electronic pen, thereby identifying the electronic pen, and detecting the position where this electronic pen is in contact.
The touch panel system described in Japanese Laid-Open Patent Publication No. 2012-22543 can use only a special electronic pen, which provides poor usability. Accordingly, a touch panel system has been desired that can accurately detect a position of an arbitrary indicator, which is not limited to the special indicator described above, in distinction from noise.