Task-Driven Plasticity: One Step Forward with UbiDraw

897 views

Published on

Task-driven plasticity refers to as the capability of a user interface to exhibit plasticity driven by the user’s task, i.e. the capability of a user interface to adapt itself to various contexts of use while preserving some predefined usability properties by performing adaptivity based on some task parameters such as complexity, frequency, and criticality. The predefined usability property con-sidered in task-driven plasticity consists of maximizing the observability of user commands in a system-initiated way driven by the ranking of different tasks and sub-tasks. In order to illustrate this concept, we developed UbiDraw, a vectorial hand drawing application that adapts its user interface by displaying, un-displaying, resizing, and relocating tool bars and icons according to the current user’s task, the task frequency, or the user’s preference for some task. This application is built on top of a context watcher and a set of ubiquitous widgets. The context watchers probes the context of use by monitoring how the user is carrying out her current tasks (e.g., task preference, task frequency) whose defi-nitions are given in a run-time task model. The context watcher sends this information to the ubiquitous widgets so as to support task-driven plasticity.

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
897
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • <number>
    Adapte l’interface utilisateur au nouveau contexte d’interaction
  • <number>
  • <number>
  • <number>
  • <number>
  • <number>
  • Task-Driven Plasticity: One Step Forward with UbiDraw

    1. 1. 1 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Task-Driven Plasticity: One Step Forward with UbiDraw Jean Vanderdonckt, Juan Manuel González Calleros Université catholique de Louvain (UCL) Louvain School of Management (LSM) - Information Systems Unit (ISYS) Belgian Laboratory of Computer-Human Interaction (BCHI) http://www.isys.ucl.ac.be/bchi
    2. 2. 2 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Outline • Introduction • Related Work • UbiDraw • Evaluation • Conclusion
    3. 3. 3 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Outline • Introduction • Related Work • UbiDraw • Evaluation • Conclusion
    4. 4. 4 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Motivation •Porting User Interfaces – Always has posed challenges • Adaptation to screen sizes • Introduction of alternative modalities
    5. 5. 5 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Motivation • Ubiquitous computing – The context in not anymore limited or known – The surrounding world becomes an interface to virtually any type of interactive system
    6. 6. 6 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Traditional solutions • Porting UIs has been solved by: – Techniques that do not affect the initial design • Simple Porting • zoom in/out • Advantages – consistency between the different versions • Drawbacks – Simple porting reduce the available screen real estate – zooming may induce many operations related to the zoom manipulation
    7. 7. 7 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Traditional solutions • Gathering functions that are related in principle to the same task. • Related functions can also presented in collapsible tool bars
    8. 8. 8 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Traditional solutions • Plastic User Interfaces – Concerns the capacity of a multi-context UI to preserve usability properties across the various contexts of use (User, Platform, Environment) – Technique that changed the UI design • Some reconfiguration of the UI is often needed. – reconfiguration of UI widgets (low level of abstraction) – Task Level (high level of abstraction) To investigate to what extent UI can be ”plastified” at a higher level of concern than the physical one
    9. 9. 9 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Solution proposed • UbiDraw – Vectorial hand drawing application that adapts its user interface. • displaying, undisplaying, resizing, and relocating tool bars and icons • according to the current user’s task, the task frequency, or the user’s preference for some task. – The context watcher sends this information to the ubiquitous widgets so as to support task-driven plasticity. – supports task-driven plasticity based on a small toolkit of task-driven plastic widgets, called UbiWidgets. • Usability evaluation – investigates the effect of using UbiWidgets on the user preference by conducting some usability testing.
    10. 10. 10 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Outline • Introduction • Related Work • UbiDraw • Evaluation • Conclusion
    11. 11. 11 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Multiplicity of contexts of use Location Role Device Experience Sporting Multimedia Travel programme Working Travel booking site Powerful interface for complex operations Travelling Booking notification Everywhere connectivity for simple data exchange Family TV is multi-media family device #1 • Context of use = (User, Platform, Environment)
    12. 12. 12 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Environment T Cameleon Reference Framework Final user Interface T Concrete user Interface T Task and Domain T Abstract user Interface T T=Target context of use Concrete user Interface S Final user Interface S Task and Domain S Abstract user Interface S S=Source context of use Reification Abstraction Reflexion Translation UsiXML unsupported model UsiXML supported model User S Platform S Environment S Platform TUser T
    13. 13. 13 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Related Work • software probe allows deploying interactive systems that constantly probe the context of use for a significant change and that reflect such a change into a UI adaptation. [Calvary, Coutaz and Thevenin 2001] [Jabarin and Graham 2003]
    14. 14. 14 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Related Work • The implementation is independent of the underlying computing platform and that offers multiple representations of concrete UIs for the same description. [Schneider et al. 2002]
    15. 15. 15 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Related Work • A toolkit of context-aware widgets that embed plasticity: in this toolkit, widgets have been abstracted with respect to the underlying physical environment so as to form platform-independent widgets. These widgets can also change their interaction modality. [Crease et al. 2000]
    16. 16. 16 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Related Work • Comets propagates interaction needs from the final UI to the task and domain level through concrete and abstract UIs via a set of logical mappings. [Demeure et al. 2000]
    17. 17. 17 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Our Work • It drives the plasticity mechanism from a task model located at the task & domain level. A change of the context of use is firstly interpreted in terms of a task variation that is then reflected into the Concrete UI level and Final UI level, respectively.
    18. 18. 18 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Outline • Introduction • State of the Art • UbiDraw • Evaluation • Conclusion
    19. 19. 19 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 UbiDraw • Develop in a multi-platform environment (Mozart) • Using a multi-paradigm language (Qtk based on Oz programming) • Functionalities are group by similarities in tool bars: – File – Draw – Options – Retouch • Every toolbar can be displayed at different locations depending on screen size and resolution of the application running on a particular platform
    20. 20. 20 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 UbiDraw • Each group may be displayed in three different ways according with its status Hidden Vertical Horizontal
    21. 21. 21 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 UbiDraw • To determine the size of a non-hidden toolbar and how many icons should be displayed – the last icon being clicked, – the rank representing the users’ preference/need for this icon, and – the amount of clicks on this icon. – The higher the priority of an icon is, the more likely it will be displayed
    22. 22. 22 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Software Architecture • The process of plasticity is located at the UI control component: the plasticity is regulated at the highest possible level in the meta-model. • In this case, only control rules govern the plasticity. CUI
    23. 23. 23 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Run-Time Plasticity in UbiDraw • Steps for run time plasticity as it is implemented in UbiDraw • Adaptation with UbiDraw always results from user initiative
    24. 24. 24 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 UbiWidget
    25. 25. 25 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 ContextWatcher • Assign a position and size to each UbiWidget when the context is changed • The UbiWidget draw itself • Strategy : • Consider UbiWidgets ranking, – Priority mechanism – Highest ranking are displayed first • Display the maximum number of widgets top left of the screen, with their minimal size
    26. 26. 26 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Links ContextWatcher and models
    27. 27. 27 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 ModifyConfig • Goal : reconfigure the adaptation of the UbiMenuBar • Result: adaptivity & adaptability
    28. 28. 28 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 ContextWatcher Size allocation • Example :
    29. 29. 29 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Outline • Introduction • State of the Art • UbiDraw • Evaluation • Conclusion
    30. 30. 30 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Method • Questionnaire-Based evaluation • 9 users : not enough but better than nothing! – Level of expertise using a PocketPC – Familiarity with computer supported drawing • Task Analysis – Four different task 1. Load an existing drawing - PocketPC 2. Draw a line - PocketPC 3. Draw a rectangle with mid-sized lines - PocketPC 4. Draw a house, resizing the canvas - Desktop • The first three tasks had to be realized as quick as possible. • Users were explicitly invited to test the plasticity of the application, that is to say to resize the main window to fit their task • Users were asked to indicate which adaptation mechanism they favored – ranking click number, click number Ranking
    31. 31. 31 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Method • The user was then invited to rank the available tasks according to his preferences • They were then invited to test the application with and without his customized ranking. Questionnaire – The results were collected in a questionnaire with items represented according to 7-point Likert scale. Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Strongly Agree (N/A) – Some space was left at the end of the questionnaires for positive and negative aspects, and for further comments.
    32. 32. 32 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Results and Discussion • User Testing • Preferences • Results
    33. 33. 33 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Outline • Introduction • State of the Art • UbiDraw • Evaluation • Conclusion
    34. 34. 34 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Conclusion • Original properties – A unique form of plasticity – A task-driven mechanism – An instantiation of the general software architecture for plasticity – A distribution of responsibilities – A reasonable usability – Consistency – Continuity • Further investigation is required to fully assess the usability properties of interest that are predefined in the plasticity notion. • UbiDraw is restricted to a simple context change: window resizing and change of platform • We did not investigate further how other changes of contextual properties may significantly or not affect the UI plasticity.
    35. 35. 35 HCSE 2008, 2nd Conference on Human-Centred Software Engineering , Pisa, 25-26 September 2008 Thank you very much for your attention For more information and downloading, http://www.isys.ucl.ac.be/bchi http://www.usixml.org User Interface eXtensible Markup Language http://www.similar.cc European network on Multimodal UIs Special thanks to all members of the team!

    ×