An approach to formal verification of human–computer interaction

Curzon, Paul; Rukšėnas, Rimvydas; Blandford, Ann

doi:10.1007/s00165-007-0035-6

Cited by 66 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When a bug was reported in his own code (part of the Sun Java library), Joshua Bloch found 14 that the binary search algorithm-proved correct many years before (by, amongst others Jon Bentley in his Communications column) and upon which a generation of programmers had relied-harbored a subtle flaw. The problem arose when the sum of the low and high bounds exceeded the largest representable integer 15 . Of course, the proof wasn't wrong in a technical sense; there was an assumption that no integer overflow would occur (which was reasonable when Bentley wrote his column, given that computer memories back then were not large enough to hold such a large array).…”

Section: Problems With Proofsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assurance of Agent Systems: What Role Should Formal Verification Play?

Winikoff

2010

Specification and Verification of Multi-Agent Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Department of Information Science is one of seven departments that make up the School of Business at the University of Otago. The department offers courses of study leading to a major in Information Science within the BCom, BA and BSc degrees. In addition to undergraduate teaching, the department is also strongly involved in postgraduate research programmes leading to MCom, MA, MSc and PhD degrees. Research projects in spatial information processing, connectionist-based information systems, software engineering and software development, information engineering and database, software metrics, distributed information systems, multimedia information systems and information systems security are particularly well supported.The views expressed in this paper are not necessarily those of the department as a whole. The accuracy of the information presented in this paper is the sole responsibility of the authors. CopyrightCopyright remains with the authors. Permission to copy for research or teaching purposes is granted on the condition that the authors and the Series are given due acknowledgment. Reproduction in any form for purposes other than research or teaching is forbidden unless prior written permission has been obtained from the authors. CorrespondenceThis paper represents work to date and may not necessarily form the basis for the authors' final conclusions relating to this topic. It is likely, however, that the paper will appear in some form in a journal or in conference proceedings in the near future. The authors would be pleased to receive correspondence in connection with any of the issues raised in this paper, or for subsequent publication details. Please write directly to the authors at the address provided below. (Details of final journal/conference publication venues for these papers are also provided on the Department's publications web pages: http://www.otago.ac.nz/informationscience/pubs/). Any other correspondence concerning the Series should be sent to the DPS Coordinator. AbstractIn this paper we consider the broader issue of gaining assurance that an agent system will behave appropriately when it is deployed. We ask to what extent this problem is addressed by existing research into formal verification. We identify a range of issues with existing work which leads us to conclude that, broadly speaking, verification approaches on their own are too narrowly focussed. We argue that a shift in direction is needed, and outline some possibilities for such a shift in direction.

show abstract

Section: Problems With Proofsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…13 The analysis only considered data up to 1992; however, there does not appear to be any more recent analysis. 14 http://googleresearch.blogspot.com/2006/06/extra-extra-read-all-about-it-nearly.html 15 That is, code of the form middle = (high + low) / 2.…”

Section: Assumptions In the Waste Disposal Robot Case Study Revisitedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assurance of Agent Systems: What Role Should Formal Verification Play?

Winikoff

2010

Specification and Verification of Multi-Agent Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We then formalised [RBC + 08] these dependencies within our abstract cognitive architecture developed earlier [CuB01,CRB07,RCB + 07]. The architecture formalises abstract cognitive principles, such as a user entering an interaction with knowledge of the task and its subsidiary goals, and choosing non-deterministically between appropriate actions.…”

Section: Our Earlier Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Verification-guided modelling of salience and cognitive load

et al. 2009

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Well-designed interfaces use procedural and sensory cues to increase the cognitive salience of appropriate actions. However, empirical studies suggest that cognitive load can influence the strength of those cues. We formalise the relationship between salience and cognitive load revealed by empirical data. We add these rules to our abstract cognitive architecture, based on higher-order logic and developed for the formal verification of usability properties. The interface of a fire engine dispatch task from the empirical studies is then formally modelled and verified. The outcomes of this verification and their comparison with the empirical data provide a way of assessing our salience and load rules. They also guide further iterative refinements of these rules. Furthermore, the juxtaposition of the outcomes of formal analysis and empirical studies suggests new experimental hypotheses, thus providing input to researchers in cognitive science.

show abstract

“…Most is focused at the level of the dialogue starting at symbolic actions such as 'key A pressed' and on the behaviour of the digital system; although some work includes models of the physical systems being controlled by the digital device and even the user's mental states or behaviour so that conjoint properties can be investigated (e.g. [YGS89,CuR07]). Modelling of the physical aspects of interaction devices seems rare, a notable exception is Thimbleby's recent work modelling of the layout of controls [Thi07].…”

Section: Modelling Physical and Continuous Actionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physigrams: modelling devices for natural interaction

Dix

Ghazali

Gill³

et al. 2009

Form. Asp. Comput.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper explores the formal specification of the physical behaviour of devices 'unplugged' from their digital effects. By doing this we seek to better understand the nature of physical interaction and the way this can be exploited to improve the design of hybrid devices with both physical and digital features. We use modified state transition networks of the physical behaviour, which we call physiograms, and link these to parallel diagrams of the digital state. These are used to describe a number of features of physical interaction exposed by previous work and relevant properties expressed using a formal semantics of the diagrams. As well as being an analytic tool, the physigrams have been used in a case study where product designers used and adapted them as part of the design process.

show abstract

An approach to formal verification of human–computer interaction

Cited by 66 publications

References 40 publications

Assurance of Agent Systems: What Role Should Formal Verification Play?

Assurance of Agent Systems: What Role Should Formal Verification Play?

Verification-guided modelling of salience and cognitive load

Physigrams: modelling devices for natural interaction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About