Proceedings of the 2007 Workshop on Experimental Computer Science 2007
DOI: 10.1145/1281700.1281710
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The user in experimental computer systems research

Abstract: Experimental computer systems research typically ignores the end-user, modeling him, if at all, in overly simple ways. We argue that this (1) results in inadequate performance evaluation of the systems, and (2) ignores opportunities. We summarize our experiences with (a) directly evaluating user satisfaction and (b) incorporating user feedback in four different areas of client/server computing, and use our experiences to motivate principles for that domain. We then generalize (a) and (b) as recommendations for… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
(31 reference statements)
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An intriguing possibility made available by user-based modeling is to incorporate feedback: we can create a "smart" model in which users are not oblivious, but rather create additional work in a way that reflects satisfaction with previous results (assuming we can get a handle on the factors leading to satisfaction [181]). In fact, feedback can affect all three models: at the population level, dissatisfied users may elect to leave and cease using the system; at the session level, a session may be truncated short when the system is not responsive, or else it may be extended if the work flows well; and at the activity level, jobs may be delayed until previous ones terminate and their results are examined.…”
Section: The Three-level User-based Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…An intriguing possibility made available by user-based modeling is to incorporate feedback: we can create a "smart" model in which users are not oblivious, but rather create additional work in a way that reflects satisfaction with previous results (assuming we can get a handle on the factors leading to satisfaction [181]). In fact, feedback can affect all three models: at the population level, dissatisfied users may elect to leave and cease using the system; at the session level, a session may be truncated short when the system is not responsive, or else it may be extended if the work flows well; and at the activity level, jobs may be delayed until previous ones terminate and their results are examined.…”
Section: The Three-level User-based Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a result the response time metric should be replaced by the throughput metric, which further explains why "equivalent conditions" can no longer be interpreted as running exactly the same jobs, but rather as facing the same workload-generation process. We also obtain a more direct (albeit still debatable [181]) assessment of user satisfaction.…”
Section: End Boxmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…First, while the common wisdom is that 50 − 100 ms is the lower bound that clients care about; this is still an open research question. Recent results indicate that there is a tremendous variation in user satisfaction in interactive applications [9]. Second, there are scenarios, such as multiplayer games over the Internet, where users would care about improving their performance relative to other players, hence reducing their response time.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Extensive user studies (e.g. [4,7,3]) have demonstrated in contexts outside of networks that measured user satisfaction with a given control operating point exhibits considerable variation across users. Measuring individual user satisfaction online and then using such measurements directly in the control process makes it possible to exploit this variation to the mutual benefit of users and systems (e.g.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%