research-article

A bisimulation-based approach to the analysis of human-computer interaction

Authors:

Sébastien Combéfis,

Charles PecheurAuthors Info & Claims

EICS '09: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI symposium on Engineering interactive computing systems

Pages 101 - 110

https://doi.org/10.1145/1570433.1570454

Published: 15 July 2009 Publication History

Get Access

Abstract

This paper discusses the use of formal methods for analysing human-computer interaction. We focus on the mode confusion problem that arises whenever the user thinks that the system is doing something while it is in fact doing another thing. We consider two kinds of models: the system model describes the actual behaviour of the system and the mental model represents the user's knowledge of the system. The user interface is modelled as a subset of system transitions that the user can control or observe. We formalize a full-control property which holds when a mental model and associated user interface are complete enough to allow proper control of the system. This property can be verified using model-checking techniques on the parallel composition of the two models. We propose a bisimulation-based equivalence relation on the states of the system and show that, if the system satisfies a determinism condition with respect to that equivalence, then minimization modulo that equivalence produces a minimal mental model that allows full-control of the system. We enrich our approach to take operating modes into account. We give experimental results obtained by applying a prototype implementation of the proposed techniques to a simple model of an air-conditioner.

References

[1]

Danby silhouette®, DPAC120061 model, user manual.

Google Scholar

[2]

A. Blanford, R. Butterworth, and P. Curzon. Models of interactive systems: a case study on programmable user modelling. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60(2):149--200, Feb. 2004.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[3]

M. L. Bolton, E. J. Bass, and R. I. Siminiceanu. Using formal methods to predict human error and system failures. In Proceedings of the 2nd Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics International Conference, pages 14--17, July 2008.

Google Scholar

[4]

H. Bowman and R. Gomez. Concurrency Theory: Calculi and Automata for Modelling Untimed and Timed Concurrent Systems. Springer, Dec. 2005.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[5]

B. Buth. Analysing mode confusion: An approach using FDR2. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security, volume 3219 of Lecture Note in Computer Science, pages 101--114. Springer, 2004.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[6]

J. C. Campos. Using task knowledge to guide interactor specifications analysis. In Proceedings of the 10th International Workshop on Interactive Systems: Design, Specification and Verification, volume 2844 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 171--186. Springer-Verlag, 2003.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[7]

J. C. Campos and M. D. Harrison. Model checking interactor specifications. Automated Software Engineering, 8(3--4):275--310, 2001.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[8]

J. C. Campos and M. D. Harrison. Systematic analysis of control panel interfaces using formal tools. In Proceedings of the 15th International Workshop on the Design, Verification and Specification of Interactive Systems, number 5136 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 72--85. Springer-Verlag, July 2008.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[9]

J. C. Campos, M. D. Harrison, and K. Loer. Verifying user interface behaviour with model checking. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Verification and Validation of Enterprise Information Systems, pages 87--96, 2004.

Google Scholar

[10]

E. M. Clarke Jr, O. Grumberg, and D. A. Peled. Model checking. The MIT Press, Jan. 1999.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[11]

P. Curzon, R. Rukšėnas, and A. Blandford. An approach to formal verification of human-computer interaction. Formal Aspects of Computing, 19(4):513--550, Nov. 2007.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[12]

A. Degani. Taming HAL: Designing Interfaces Beyond 2001. Palgrave Macmillan, Jan. 2004.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[13]

G. J. Doherty, J. C. Campos, and M. D. Harrison. Representational reasoning and verification. Formal Aspects of Computing, 12(4):260--277, Dec. 2000.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[14]

J. Gow and H. Thimbleby. MAUI: An interface design tool based on matrix algebra. In R. J. K. Jacob, Q. Limbourg, and J. Vanderdonckt, editors, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computer-Aided Design of User Interfaces, pages 81--94. Kluwer, 2004.

Google Scholar

[15]

J. F. Groote and F. Vaandrager. An efficient algorithm for branching bisimulation and stuttering equivalence. In Proceedings of the 17th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming, pages 626--638, 1990.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[16]

M. Heymann and A. Degani. Formal analysis and automatic generation of user interfaces: Approach, methodology, and an algorithm. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 49(2):311--330, Apr. 2007.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[17]

M. Heymann, A. Degani, and I. Barshi. Generating procedures and recovery sequences : A formal approach. In Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, 2007.

Google Scholar

[18]

D. Javaux. A method for predicting errors when interacting with finite state systems. How implicit learning shapes the user's knowledge of a system. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 75:147--165, Feb. 2002.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[19]

N. G. Leveson, L. D. Pinnel, S. D. Sandys, S. Koga, and J. D. Reese. Analyzing software specifications for mode confusion potential. In Workshop on Human Error and System Development, pages 132--146, 1997.

Google Scholar

[20]

N. G. Leveson and C. S. Turner. Investigation of the therac-25 accidents. IEEE Computer, 26(7):18--41, July 1993.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[21]

R. Milner. Communication and Concurrency. Prentice-Hall, Dec. 1989.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[22]

R. Paige and R. E. Tarjan. Three partition refinement algorithms. SIAM Journal on Computing, 16(6):973--989, Dec. 1987.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[23]

E. Palmer. Oops, it didn't arm.--a case study of two automation surprises. In Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, pages 227--232, 1996.

Google Scholar

[24]

D. Park. Concurrency and automata on infinite sequences. In Proceedings of the 5th GI-Conference on Theoretical Computer Science, pages 167--183. Springer-Verlag, 1981.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[25]

J. Rushby. Using model checking to help discover mode confusions and other automation surprises. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 75(2):167--177, Feb. 2002.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[26]

N. B. Starter and D. D. Woods. How in the world did we ever get into that mode ? Mode error and awareness in supervisory control. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 37(1):5--19, Mar. 1995.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[27]

The JUNG Team, J. O'Madadhain, D. Fisher, and T. Nelson. Java Universal Network/Graph Framework (JUNG). http://jung.sourceforge.net/, 2003--2007.

Google Scholar

[28]

H. Thimbleby. Creating user manuals for using in collaborative design. In Proceedings of the Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 279--280, New York, NY, USA, 1996. ACM.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[29]

H. Thimbleby and J. Gow. Applying graph theory to interaction design. In J. Gulliksen, editor, Engineering Interactive Systems 2007/DSVIS 2007, number 4940 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 501--518. Springer-Verlag, 2008.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

Radomirović S(2020)Shaping Our Mental Model of SecuritySecurity Protocols XXVII10.1007/978-3-030-57043-9_5(51-59)Online publication date: 21-Aug-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57043-9_5
Sivaramakrishnan VThapliyal OVinod AOishi MHwang I(2019)Predicting Mode Confusion Through Mixed Integer Linear Programming2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)10.1109/CDC40024.2019.9029901(2442-2448)Online publication date: Dec-2019
https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC40024.2019.9029901
Geniet RSingh N(2018)Refinement Based Formal Development of Human-Machine InterfaceSoftware Technologies: Applications and Foundations10.1007/978-3-030-04771-9_19(240-256)Online publication date: 6-Dec-2018
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04771-9_19
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

A bisimulation-based approach to the analysis of human-computer interaction
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
2. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management
    1. Software verification and validation
      1. Formal software verification
  2. Software organization and properties
    1. Software functional properties
      1. Formal methods

Recommendations

Bisimulation on speed: a unified approach

Two process-algebraic approaches have been developed for comparing two bisimulation-equivalent processes with respect to speed: the one of Moller/Tofts equips actions with lower time bounds, while the other by Lüttgen/Vogler considers upper time bounds ...
Bisimulation can't be traced

In the concurrent language CCS, two programs are considered the same if they are bisimilar. Several years and many researchers have demonstrated that the theory of bisimulation is mathematically appealing and useful in practice. However, bisimulation ...
Formal Methods in Human-Computer Interaction and Adaptive Instructional Systems
Adaptive Instructional Systems. Design and Evaluation
Abstract
Building reliable interactive systems has been identified as an important and difficult task from the late ‘60s. One approach to augment the reliability of interactive systems is to use formal models during system development. Formal methods have ...

Reviews

Reviewer: Harekrishna Misra

When developing usable systems, incorporating user requirements and managing human factors is very challenging. Usable systems are greatly influenced by ease of use-that is, the human-computer interface through which users' intentions are reflected in the systems. It is very important to capture users' intentions holistically. Managing systems through their entire life cycle and handling related issues are complex tasks. Systems become complex because of organizational dynamics, process improvement imperatives, user demands, and overall organizational interfaces with external agencies. Human-computer interfaces address all dimensions of complexity. Combéfis and Pecheur discuss "formal methods for analysing human-computer interaction." More specifically, their approach aims to capture user knowledge with mental modeling concepts, using bisimulation. The discussion of these methods makes the paper current, as it attempts to address the complex dimensions of a user-oriented approach to systems. The authors use case studies to illustrate their approach; the concepts are explained through simple algorithms for an air conditioner. The paper fails to explain the proposed approach's examples and applications. For example, to really appreciate the approach, the vehicle transmission example should have been explained using unified modeling language (UML), via a sequence diagram. Furthermore, an algorithmic comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of the models applied to the vehicle example would have enhanced the work's clarity. Unfortunately, the bisimulation results of the air conditioner experiment are not compared with the results of other approaches. Also, the authors don't discuss user knowledge captured through states, transitions, and modes of operation. This paper is quite interesting in terms of theory, modeling, and algorithmic presentation. It will attract the attention of researchers and students who study this complex phenomenon. Online Computing Reviews Service

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

EICS '09: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI symposium on Engineering interactive computing systems

July 2009

348 pages

ISBN:9781605586007

DOI:10.1145/1570433

General Chair:
T.C. Nicholas Graham
Queen's University, Canada
,
Program Chairs:
Gaëlle Calvary
University of Grenoble, France
,
Philip Gray
University of Glasgow, United Kingdom

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 15 July 2009

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

EICS'09

Sponsor:

EICS'09: Engineering Interactive Computing Systems

July 15 - 17, 2009

PA, Pittsburgh, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 73 of 299 submissions, 24%

Upcoming Conference

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

15
Total Citations
View Citations
394
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)1
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 06 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

Radomirović S(2020)Shaping Our Mental Model of SecuritySecurity Protocols XXVII10.1007/978-3-030-57043-9_5(51-59)Online publication date: 21-Aug-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57043-9_5
Sivaramakrishnan VThapliyal OVinod AOishi MHwang I(2019)Predicting Mode Confusion Through Mixed Integer Linear Programming2019 IEEE 58th Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)10.1109/CDC40024.2019.9029901(2442-2448)Online publication date: Dec-2019
https://doi.org/10.1109/CDC40024.2019.9029901
Geniet RSingh N(2018)Refinement Based Formal Development of Human-Machine InterfaceSoftware Technologies: Applications and Foundations10.1007/978-3-030-04771-9_19(240-256)Online publication date: 6-Dec-2018
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04771-9_19
Li MWei JZheng XBolton M(2017)A Formal Machine–Learning Approach to Generating Human–Machine Interfaces From Task ModelsIEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems10.1109/THMS.2017.270063047:6(822-833)Online publication date: Dec-2017
https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2017.2700630
Brat GCombéfis SGiannakopoulou DPecheur CRaimondi FRungta N(2017)Formal Analysis of Multiple Coordinated HMI SystemsThe Handbook of Formal Methods in Human-Computer Interaction10.1007/978-3-319-51838-1_15(405-431)Online publication date: 25-Apr-2017
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51838-1_15
Maudoux GPecheur CCombéfis S(2017)Learning Safe Interactions and Full-ControlThe Handbook of Formal Methods in Human-Computer Interaction10.1007/978-3-319-51838-1_11(297-317)Online publication date: 25-Apr-2017
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51838-1_11
Oliveira RPalanque PWeyers BBowen JDix A(2017)State of the Art on Formal Methods for Interactive SystemsThe Handbook of Formal Methods in Human-Computer Interaction10.1007/978-3-319-51838-1_1(3-55)Online publication date: 25-Apr-2017
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51838-1_1
Combefis SGiannakopoulou DPecheur C(2016)Automatic Detection of Potential Automation Surprises for ADEPT ModelsIEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems10.1109/THMS.2015.242485146:2(267-278)Online publication date: Apr-2016
https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2015.2424851
Ishii DUshio T(2016)A Bisimulation-Based Design of User Interface With Alerts Avoiding Automation SurprisesIEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems10.1109/THMS.2014.236089246:2(317-323)Online publication date: Apr-2016
https://doi.org/10.1109/THMS.2014.2360892
Pham TRabah MEstraillier P(2015)A Situation-Based Multi-Agent Architecture for Handling Misunderstandings in InteractionsInternational Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computer Science10.1515/amcs-2015-003325:3(439-454)Online publication date: 1-Sep-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1515/amcs-2015-0033
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Bisimulation on speed: a unified approach

Bisimulation can't be traced

Formal Methods in Human-Computer Interaction and Adaptive Instructional Systems

Reviews

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here