Modelling Devices for Natural Interaction

Alan Dix1, Masitah Ghazali2 and Devina Ramduny-Ellis1
1 Computing Department, Infolab21 Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
2 Information Systems Department, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia
< Alan on the Web > < Masitah on the Web > < Devina on the Web >

Paper at FMIS 2007 2nd International Workshop on Formal Methods for Interactive Systems, 4th September 2007, Lancaster, UK.

Download full paper (pre-proceedings version, PDF, 840K)

Abstract

We do not interact with systems without first performing some physical action on a physical device. This paper shows how formal notations and formal models can be developed to account for the relationship between the physical devices that we actually press, twist or pull and their effects on systems. We use state diagrams of each but find we have to extend these in order to account for features such as bounce-back,
where buttons or other controls are sprung. Critical to all is the fact that we are physical creatures and so formal models have to take into account that physicality.

Keywords: physicality, interaction modelling, affordance, natural interaction, physical devices
Full reference:
A. Dix, M. Ghazali and D. Ramduny-Ellis (2007). Modelling Devices for Natural Interaction Proceedings of FMIS'2005. Electrinic Noties in Theoretical Compter Science, Vol 208, pp 23-40, Elsevier, doi:10.1016/j.entcs.2008.03.105
http://www.hcibook.com/alan/papers/
FMIS2007-physical/
more:
physicality.org - investigating issues of physicality in human interaction
Aladdin's lamp: understanding new from old ... about other kinds on natural interaction
Visceral Interaction paper at HCI'2005
Physigrams: Modelling Devices for Natural Interaction extended version of this paper in Formal Aspects of Computing
Alan's essays on imagination and rationality and related topics
web site
Download full paper (PDF, 840K)

References

  1. Benford, S., H.Schnadelbach, B. Koleva, B. Gaver, A. Schmidt, A. Boucher, A. Steed, R. Anastasi, C.Greenhalgh, T. Rodden and H. Gellersen, “Sensible, Sensable and Desirable: A Framework for Designing Physical Interfaces,” Technical Report Equator-03-003, Equator, (2003) http://www.equator.ac.uk/.
  2. Buxton, W., A Three-State Model of Graphical Input, in: Human–Computer Interaction – INTERACT
    ’90. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V, (North-Holland), (1990), 449–456.
  3. Dix, A., “Formal Methods for Interactive Systems,” Academic Press, 1991
    http://www.hiraeth.com/books/formal/.
  4. Dix, A. and G. Abowd, Model ling status and event behaviour of interactive systems. Software Engineering Journal, 11:6 (1996), 334–346 http://www.hcibook.com/alan/papers/SEJ96-s+e/.
  5. Dix, A., Getting Physical. keynote at: OZCHI 2003, Brisbane, Australia, 26-28 Nov 2003 http://www.hcibook.com/alan/talks/ozchi2003-keynote/.
  6. Dix, A., J. Finlay, G. Abowd and R. Beale, “Human-Computer Interaction. Third Edition,” Prentice Hall, (2004) http://www.hcibook.com/e3/.
  7. Gaver, W., Technology affordances. in: Proceedings of CHI ’91. ACM Press, (1991),79–84.
  8. Ghazali, M. and A. Dix, Aladdin’s lamp: understanding new from old. In 1st UK-UbiNet Workshop, 25-26th September 2003, Imperial College London (2003) http://www.hcibook.com/alan/papers/ubinet-2003/.
  9. Ghazali, M. and A. Dix, Visceral Interaction. in: Proceedings of the 10th British HCI conference, Vol 2, September 5-9, Edinburgh. (2005), 68–72 http://www.hcibook.com/alan/papers/visceral-2005/.
  10. Gibson, J., “The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception,” Houghton Mifflin Company, USA, 1986.
  11. Hartson, H., Cognitive, physical, sensory, and functional affordances in interaction design. Behaviour & Information Technology 22:5 (2003), 315–338.
  12. Nielsen, J., and R. Mack, “Usability Inspection Methods,” John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1994.
  13. Norman, D., Affordance, conventions, and design. Interactions 6:3 (1999), 38–43
  14. Pfaff, G., and P. Hagen, (Eds.). “Seeheim Workshop on User Interface Management Systems,” Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 1985.
  15. Shneiderman, B., Direct manipulation: a step beyond programming languages. IEEE Computer 16:8 (1983), 57–69.
  16. Wensveen, S., J. Dja jadiningrat and C. Overbeeke, Interaction Frogger: A Design Framework to Couple Action and Function. in: Proceedings of the DIS’04, ACM Press, (2004) 177–184
  17. UIMS The UIMS tool developers workshop: A metamodel for the runtime architecture of an interactive system. SIGCHI Bulletin, 24:1 (1992), 32–37,


FIGURE 1.


FIGURE 2.

   
FIGURE 3.


FIGURE 4.

x
FIGURE 5.


FIGURE 6 (i).


FIGURE 6 (ii).

  
FIGURE 7 (i).


FIGURE 7 (ii).


FIGURE 8.

   
FIGURE 9.


FIGURE 10.


http://www.hcibook.com/alan/papers/FMIS2007-physical/

Alan Dix 5/1/2007