Abstract
Although the take-up of formal approaches to modelling and reasoning about software has been slow, there has been recent interest and facility in the use of automated reasoning techniques such as model checking [5] on increasingly complex systems. In the case of interactive systems, formal methods can be particularly useful in reasoning about systems that involve complex interactions. These techniques for the analysis of interactive systems typically focus on the device and leave the context of use undocumented. In this paper we look at models that incorporate complexity explicitly, and discuss how they can be used in a formal setting. The paper is concerned particularly with the type of analysis that can be performed with them.
The original version of the book was revised: The copyright line was incorrect. The Erratum to the book is available at DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-92698-6_37
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Butterworth, R., Blandford, A., Duke, D., Young, R.M.: Formal user models and methods for reasoning about interactive behaviour. In: Siddiqi, J., Roast, C. (eds.) Formal Aspects of the Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 176–192. SHU Press (1998)
Campos, J.C.: Automated Deduction and Usability Reasoning. DPhil thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of York (September 1999)
Campos, J.C., Doherty, G.J.: Supporting resource-based analysis of task information needs. In: Gilroy, S.W., Harrison, M.D. (eds.) DSV-IS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3941, pp. 188–200. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Campos, J.C., Harrison, M.D.: Model Checking Interactor Specifications. Automated Software Engineering 8(3), 275–310 (2001)
Clarke Jr., E.M., Grumberg, O., Peled, D.A.: Model Checking. MIT Press, Cambridge (1999)
Desurvire, H.W., Kondziela, J.M., Atwood, M.E.: What is gained and lost when using evaluation methods other than empirical testing. In: Monk, A., Diaper, D., Harrison, M.D. (eds.) People and Computers VII — Proceedings of HCI 1992. British Computer Society Conference Series, pp. 89–102. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1992)
Doherty, G.J., Campos, J.C., Harrison, M.D.: Representational Reasoning and Verification. Formal Aspects of Computing 12(4), 260–277 (2000)
Gow, J., Thimbleby, H., Cairns, P.: Automatic Critiques of Interface Modes. In: Gilroy, S.W., Harrison, M.D. (eds.) DSV-IS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3941, pp. 201–212. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)
Gray, W., Salzman, M.: Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods. Human Computer Interaction 13(3), 203–261 (1998)
Hartson, H.R., Andre, T.S., Williges, R.C.: Criteria for Evaluating Usability Evaluation Methods. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 1(15), 145–181 (2003)
ISO: International Standard ISO 9241-11: Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs) – Part 11: Guidance on Usability, International Organization for Standardisation, Geneva (1998)
Lewis, C., Polson, P., Wharton, C., Rieman, J.: Testing a walkthrough methodology for theory-based design of walk-up-and-use interfaces. In: CHI 1990 Proceedings, pp. 235–242. ACM Press, New York (1990)
Nielsen, J., Molich, R.: Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 249–256. ACM Press, New York (1990)
Palmer, E.: Oops, it didn’t arm – a case study of two automation surprises. In: Jensen, R.S., Rakovan, L.A. (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, pp. 227–232. Ohio State University (1995)
Paternò, F.D.: A Method for Formal Specification and Verification of Interactive Systems. D.Phil thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of York (1996)
Polson, P., Lewis, C.: Theory-Based Design for Easily Learned Interfaces. Human-Computer Interaction 5, 191–220 (1990)
Rushby, J.: Using model checking to help discover mode confusions and other automation surprises. Reliability Engineering and Systems Safety 75(2), 167–177 (2002)
Ryan, M., Fiadeiro, J., Maibaum, T.: Sharing actions and attributes in modal action logic. In: Ito, T., Meyer, A.R. (eds.) TACS 1991. LNCS, vol. 526, pp. 569–593. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)
Thimbleby, H.: User Interface Design with Matrix Algebra. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 11(2), 181–236 (2004)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Campos, J.C., Harrison, M.D. (2008). Considering Context and Users in Interactive Systems Analysis. In: Gulliksen, J., Harning, M.B., Palanque, P., van der Veer, G.C., Wesson, J. (eds) Engineering Interactive Systems. EHCI 2007. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4940. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92698-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-92698-6_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-92697-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-92698-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)