A process-oriented approach to the science of human-computer interaction

Since the birth of the field, HCI has defined itself both as a theory of therelations between humans and numerical systems and as a practical activity that aimsat building new interactive systems. However, HCI has not yet succeeded in discoveringa unified theoretical framework nor in building a strong link between both activities.Based on an analysis from various fields, we show that most of the difficulties come fromthe computational paradigm that is still used as a foundation of most of the theories inHCI. This brings us to proposing a new philosophical view on the science of HCI, basedon a process ontology. We show how it accounts for several phenomena related to HCIand unifies them. This approach lends itself to new ways of thinking and programminginteraction at di↵erent scales, which may help HCI scientists in their modelling and designactivities

Engineering distributed systems: how efficient is a computational model?

International audienc

Engineering distributed systems: how efficient is a computational model?

International audienc

Le défi anti-représentationnaliste (dynamicisme et théorie computationnelle de l'esprit)

BORDEAUX2-BU Sci.Homme/Odontol. (330632102) / SudocSudocFranceF

Modelling interactive computing systems: Do we have a good theory of what computers are?

Computers are increasingly interactive. They are no more transformational systems producing a final output after a finite execution. Instead, they continuously react in time to external events that modify the course of computing execution. While philosophers have been interested in conceptualizing computers for a long time, they seem to have paid little attention to the specificities of interactive computing. We propose to tackle this issue by surveying the literature in theoretical computer science, where one can find explicit proposals for a model of interactive computing. In that field, the formal modelling of interactive computing systems has been brought down to whether the new interaction models are reducible to Turing Machines. There are three areas where interaction models are framed. The comparison between TMs and interactive system models is at stake in all of them. These areas are namely some works on concurrency by Milner, on Reactive Turing Machines, and on interaction as a new computing paradigm. For each of the three identified models, we present its motivation, sum up its account for interaction and its legacy, and point out issues regarding the understanding of computers. The survey shows difficulties for epistemologists. The reason is that these analyses focus on the formal equivalence between interactive models of computation and classic ones. Such a project is different from addressing how a computing machine can be interactive: in other words, which mechanisms allow it

Vers la complétude interactive: exigences pour une machine abstraite orientée interaction

International audienceTuring's work on computability served as the founding theoretical framework for computer science. It aimed at formalizing the intuitive notion of algorithm and gave birth to the concepts of logical automaton and abstract machine. The latter are used to evaluate the expressiveness of programming languages. However, current systems are difficult to model within an algorithmic framework and question the relevance of the classical model. The systems we know are indeed characterized by continuous interactions between human agents, physical and computational processes. Programming these interactive systems requires to specify causal relationships between processes, and not simply the execution of computation. In this paper, we propose to define an equivalent of the classical abstract machine, to model programmable interactive systems. Based on our distinction between computation programming and interaction programming and previous theoretical works that have questioned the classical framework, we elicit the minimal requirements of an abstract machine for interaction. This work is a fist step toward an interactive model to evaluate the expressivity of interaction-oriented languages. CCS CONCEPTS • Human-centered computing → HCI theory, concepts and models

Modelling interactive computing systems: Do we have a good theory of what computers are?

Computers are increasingly interactive. They are no more transformational systems producing a final output after a finite execution. Instead, they continuously react in time to external events that modify the course of computing execution. While philosophers have been interested in conceptualizing computers for a long time, they seem to have paid little attention to the specificities of interactive computing. We propose to tackle this issue by surveying the literature in theoretical computer science, where one can find explicit proposals for a model of interactive computing. In that field, the formal modelling of interactive computing systems has been brought down to whether the new interaction models are reducible to Turing Machines. There are three areas where interaction models are framed. The comparison between TMs and interactive system models is at stake in all of them. These areas are namely some works on concurrency by Milner, on Reactive Turing Machines, and on interaction as a new computing paradigm. For each of the three identified models, we present its motivation, sum up its account for interaction and its legacy, and point out issues regarding the understanding of computers. The survey shows difficulties for epistemologists. The reason is that these analyses focus on the formal equivalence between interactive models of computation and classic ones. Such a project is different from addressing how a computing machine can be interactive: in other words, which mechanisms allow it

Computers as interactive machines: Can we build an explanatory abstraction?

International audienceIn this paper, we address the question of what current computers are from the point of view of human-computer interaction. In the early days of computing, the Turing machine (TM) has been the cornerstone of the understanding of computers. The TM defines what can be computed and how computation can be carried out. However, in the last decades, computers have evolved and increasingly become interactive systems, reacting in real-time to external events in an ongoing loop. We argue that the TM does not provide a mechanistic explanation for interactive computing. The reason is that the fundamental phenomena relevant to interactive computing are out of the scope of classical computability theory. Part of the explanatory power of the TM relies on what we propose to call an execution model. An execution model belongs to a level of abstraction where it is possible to describe both the functional architecture and the execution in mechanistic terms. An updated execution model is warranted to provide the minimal mechanistic description for interactive computation as a counterpart of what the TM could explain regarding Church-Turing computation. It would support an explanation of the ubiquitous computing devices we know-those interacting with humans, e.g., through digital interfaces. We show that such a model is not available within interactive models of computation and that relevant abstractions and concerns are available in computer engineering but need to be identified and gathered. To fill this void, we propose to reflect on the level of abstractionrequired to support the mechanistic description of an interactive execution and propose some preliminary requirements

Conception de logiciels interactifs sûrs avec DJNN

International audienc

Towards Handling Latency in Interactive Software

International audienceUsability of an interactive software can be highly impacted by the delays of propagation of data and events and by its variations, i.e. latency and jitter. The problem is striking for applications involving tactile interactions or augmented reality, where the shifts between interaction and representation can make the system unusable. For as much, latency is often taken into account only during the validation phase of the software by means of a value which constitutes an acceptable limit. In this short paper, we present and discuss an alternative approach: we want to handle the latency at all phases of the life cycle of the interactive software, from specification to runtime adaptation and formal validation for certification purposes. We plan to integrate and validate these ideas into Smala, our language dedicated to the development of highly interactive and visual user interfaces