The ACube ExperienceA retrospective analysis of an Ambient        Assisted-Living project           Luca Sabatucci
The ACube Mission• The project aimed at developing an advanced,  generic monitoring infrastructure for Ambient  Assisted L...
Strategy• Minimal Advance in the Technology  – The strength must be in the integration• “the result will be more than the ...
The Analysis of Requirements• The core problem is not technological• Central role of People  – Identify real needs and int...
Stakeholders•   The analysis team (Tropos + UCD)•   The technical team (7 research groups)•   Social Residence Managers•  ...
Expectations and Risks• Research Groups had own purposes  – Publications, Patents• Local politicians wanted a ROI in terms...
Discovering NeedsIf I’d asked my customers what they wanted,they’d have said a faster horse.                              ...
User-Centred Design Discipline• To shape the form, the function and the behavior  of interactive products, creating user e...
User Study• Business Golden Rule: If you want a user to  understand your product, you must first  understand the user.• UC...
Methods
Participatory Design• Requirements are not well-defined entities but  should be collaboratively negotiated during the  who...
Strengths and Limits of UCDStrengths                      Limits• Engagement of users          • Does not support• Extract...
The Tropos Methodology                    An Overview• Engineering Approach• Goal-oriented design process,• The focus is o...
Tropos and UCD:              a Promising Synergy• Purpose:  – synergy without reducing advantages• Enablers:  –   Ground o...
The Process• The design process is co-  evolutionary• concept design,The process                    technology  developmen...
the sensor on the door                                                                                                    ...
ACube – some lessons learnt•   The Role of Humans and Communications•   Interpretation•   The Tacit Knowledge Dimension•  ...
ACube in a nutshell - Story 1            Interpretation• Example of “diario” and “consegna”• Frequent validations is a pro...
ACube in a nutshell – Story 2          Do not ask needs• Ask preferences and “dreams”• Lacking a way for representing user...
ACube in a nutshell – Story 3             Redundancy• Example of “night as a critical moment”• Different viewpoints are so...
Open Challenges and Future Directions
Challenge 1 – Multi-Disciplinary      Design passes between different           semantic communities                      ...
Challenge 2 – Methodological              Integration• Different Concepts• Different instruments to approach the  problem•...
Challenge 3 – Evaluation• Process based on many quick iterations• Frequent verifications and prototypes• Solutions and sys...
Challenge 4 – System EvolutionUSER         LAW   Technology                                Detect                         ...
The ACube Experience
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

The ACube Experience

307 views

Published on

Luca Sabatucci
A retrospective analysis of an Ambient Assisted-Living project

CNR-ICAR SE Seminars
12/06/2012, Palermo, Italy

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
307
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
10
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

The ACube Experience

  1. 1. The ACube ExperienceA retrospective analysis of an Ambient Assisted-Living project Luca Sabatucci
  2. 2. The ACube Mission• The project aimed at developing an advanced, generic monitoring infrastructure for Ambient Assisted Living,• To realize a highly developed smart environment as a support to medical and assistance staff• Exploiting low energy consumption wireless networks of sensors and actuators.
  3. 3. Strategy• Minimal Advance in the Technology – The strength must be in the integration• “the result will be more than the sum of parts” – Services must represent a real value for users
  4. 4. The Analysis of Requirements• The core problem is not technological• Central role of People – Identify real needs and integrate them into the design. – Users must easily push their preferences into the system execution.• AAL and Society – Law compliance: effects of existing laws and new laws trying to regulate this new reality – Adaptability to the evolution of the context (needs and organization changes).
  5. 5. Stakeholders• The analysis team (Tropos + UCD)• The technical team (7 research groups)• Social Residence Managers• Social Workers (caregivers, nurses, doctors)• Politicians
  6. 6. Expectations and Risks• Research Groups had own purposes – Publications, Patents• Local politicians wanted a ROI in terms of publicity• Managers wanted to improve services and save money• What about Caregivers? What did primary users actually want?
  7. 7. Discovering NeedsIf I’d asked my customers what they wanted,they’d have said a faster horse. Henry Ford
  8. 8. User-Centred Design Discipline• To shape the form, the function and the behavior of interactive products, creating user experience• Understanding real people in the contexts where they live and work• Integrate user studies and technological development – by adopting creative and analytical methods, – exploiting cultural values (i.e. empathy, intuitions, subjectivity, synthesis, etc.)
  9. 9. User Study• Business Golden Rule: If you want a user to understand your product, you must first understand the user.• UCD seeks answers to: – What is important to users – The tasks users do, how frequently, and in what order – The users’ work environment – The users’ problems and constraints – Users’ expectations in terms of functionality – Output required & in what form – How can the design of this ‘product’ facilitate users’ cognitive processes?
  10. 10. Methods
  11. 11. Participatory Design• Requirements are not well-defined entities but should be collaboratively negotiated during the whole design life-cycle• Requirements are constructions produced by a number of actors (users, analysts, developers , designers) each acting in specific context
  12. 12. Strengths and Limits of UCDStrengths Limits• Engagement of users • Does not support• Extracting Implicit traceability Knowledge • Does not support• Concrete representation of abstraction the domain • Coverage problem• Stories prioritize requirements 13
  13. 13. The Tropos Methodology An Overview• Engineering Approach• Goal-oriented design process,• The focus is on capturing intentional and strategic dependencies among actors of a domain.• Five phases: early/later requirements, architecture, implementation and deployment.Giunchiglia et al. 2003. The Tropos Software Development Methodology: Processes,Models and Diagrams. In Agent-Oriented Software Engineering III, Springer
  14. 14. Tropos and UCD: a Promising Synergy• Purpose: – synergy without reducing advantages• Enablers: – Ground on information about people – Similar “High Level” objectives (requirements) – Similar Language (goal/need, actor/persona) – Similar methodological approach (data exploration, filtering)
  15. 15. The Process• The design process is co- evolutionary• concept design,The process technology development and design process is co- The user research evolutionary since concept design, are carried out in parallel and user technology development research are carried out in parallel• they progressively converge process so that each strand of the by can inform, without continuously comparing results constraining, the others. and retuning the the project evolves, As process• The process grounds onmore and more the intersections between the three strands become frequent; they progressively – Setting a common problem space converge by continuously – Sharing a vision on the solution comparing results and retuning the process. – Evaluate from different perspectives
  16. 16. the sensor on the door sends a signal to Maria is leaving Sabrina’s PDA that the room alerts with a vibration 8 Chiara Leonardi, Luca Sabatucci, Angelo Susi, Massimo Zancanaro The Restoration Maria is going upstairs in room - order to reach her room. RSA. 01:50 She falls in the staircase. pm. Maria is getting up from sofa. Caregivers The camera This latter goal is delegated to the ACube System actor via the goal delegations are not aware of this event identifies the event and sends signals [identify a guest dismissing the group] and [receive alerts of relevant events]. These to caregivers’ ACube A vibration alerts Sabrina that PDA. Maria’s leaving goals are two requirements to be satisfied by the system that has to operationalize POSSIBILE When Sabrina and Gianna ends their CADUTA day shift, they must them (means-ends relationships) via the plans [monitor patients] and [send alarms] PDA displays that an SCALE 1° PIANO write a report, but they find a already compiled report describing the event respectively. unknown occurred in the Instance person is fallen afternoon. They add down in the information and 4. Validation. Two focus groups have been organized with stakeholders and the tech- staircase between second and validate the information automatically collected by the nical staff for validating the list of requirements produced in the previous phase. Due third floor The nurse, Gianna, receives this signal Video, audio sensors and PDA automatically send collected data system and succour Maria. She notifies by PDA the importance of this step for the topic of the paper, this is part is discussed in details that she is taking the event in account. to the system that builds the daily report. in the following subsection. Field Data Consolidation [missing Collection details] [low quality + persona authoring model] + contextual inquiry + activity scenario authoring [study complete OR [validationinsufficient resources] [new dimension] [validation success] success] Data Envisioning Interpretation [new system + domain context analysis + Tropos late requirements aspect] + Tropos early requirements + envisioning scenarios + criticality identification [validation success] REQUIREMENTS Maria is in RSA since 3 months and she never tried to escape. After lunch, she leaves the Fig. 1: An excerpt of the Tropos model for the nursing home. group and decides to go back her room, in the second floor. She goes up the stairs and she 3.4falls down. The validation phase Maria is still conscious and asks for caregivers help. Sabrina, full After the preparation of the Tropos late requirement diagrams, and the corresponding list time OSS, hears Maria’s call and phase. Simple visual scenarios were of requirements, we started the validation designed to make the list of stairs… reaches her in the requirements more understandable by partners. To gener- ate scenarios we imagined how the system could support personas to cope with prob-
  17. 17. ACube – some lessons learnt• The Role of Humans and Communications• Interpretation• The Tacit Knowledge Dimension• Handling Viewpoints Sabatucci et al. "Epistemic Analysis" 18
  18. 18. ACube in a nutshell - Story 1 Interpretation• Example of “diario” and “consegna”• Frequent validations is a properly instrument for the early discovering of ambiguities and errors.• The analysis improves by maintaining data, as long as possible, in the same format in which they arrive from the domain Sabatucci et al. "Epistemic Analysis" 19
  19. 19. ACube in a nutshell – Story 2 Do not ask needs• Ask preferences and “dreams”• Lacking a way for representing users answers, important information may being forgotten• Importance of tracing, organizing and taking in account information that have not a clear-cut relevance at the moment of the interview. Sabatucci et al. "Epistemic Analysis" 20
  20. 20. ACube in a nutshell – Story 3 Redundancy• Example of “night as a critical moment”• Different viewpoints are sometimes difficult to conciliate• The importance of exploring motivations behind different perspectives over the domain Sabatucci et al. "Epistemic Analysis" 21
  21. 21. Open Challenges and Future Directions
  22. 22. Challenge 1 – Multi-Disciplinary Design passes between different semantic communities We need to improve our service..and to decrease costs … we should improve our algorithms and infrastructures to recognize events, We need to situa ons, ac vi es.. assure pa ent assistence, support, Family, support, privacy, … ..human contact
  23. 23. Challenge 2 – Methodological Integration• Different Concepts• Different instruments to approach the problem• Example of Ambiguity: a different perspective
  24. 24. Challenge 3 – Evaluation• Process based on many quick iterations• Frequent verifications and prototypes• Solutions and system specifications are collaboratively negotiated
  25. 25. Challenge 4 – System EvolutionUSER LAW Technology Detect Why itExploring Change Happened? Ha pp en it ? Wh ened Why? ed pp Ra onal behind en at ? Wh change When? What? Ha Wheel of Iden fy Process Evolu on Ar fact toFiltering Where pp e it Who? ? change ed W lv e d ? I nv Ha her ho ? en o How? W is Iden fy ac vi es for change How it Happened? Process of Evolu on Wheel of Evolu on

×