Abstract
This article describes a framework to formally model and analyse human behaviour. This is shown by a simple case study of a chocolate vending machine, which represents many aspects of human behaviour. The case study is modelled and analysed using the Maude rewrite system. This work extends a previous work by Basuki which attempts to model interactions between human and machine and analyse the possibility of errors occurring in the interactions. By redesigning the interface, it can be shown that certain kinds of error can be avoided for some users. This article overcomes the limitation of Basuki’s approach by incorporating many aspects of user behaviour into a single user model, and introduces a more natural approach to model human–computer interaction.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Basuki TA (2007) Model-checking interface design to reduce user errors. In: Curzon P, Cerone A (eds) The pre-proceedings of the 2nd international workshop on formal methods for interactive systems (FMIS 2007), number RR-07-08 in Technical Report, pp 1–16. Queen Mary, University of London, September 2007. ISSN 1470-5559
Butterworth R, Blandford A, Duke DJ (2000) Demonstrating the cognitive plausability of interactive systems. Formal Aspects Comput 12: 237–259
Butler RW, Miller SP, Potts JN, Carreno VA (1998) A formal methods approach to the analysis of mode confusion. In: Proc. of the 17th Digital avionics systems conference. Washington, Oct 31–Nov 6, 1998
Curzon P, Blandford A (2000) Reasoning about order errors in interaction. In: Aagaard M, Harrison J, Schubert T (eds) The Supplementary Proceedings of the 13th international conference on theorem proving in higher order logics, pp 33–48, Portland U.S., August 2000. Oregon Graduate Institute, Oregon
Curzon P, Blandford A (2000) Using a verification system to reason about post-completion errors. In: Palanque PA, Paterno F (eds) Participants Proc. of DSV-IS 2000: 7th Int. workshop on design, specification and verification of interactive systems, at the 22nd Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, pp 292–308
Curzon P, Blandford A (2001) Detecting multiple classes of user errors. In: Little MR, Nigay L (eds) Proceedings of the 8th IFIP international conference on engineering for human–computer interaction, pp 57–72
Clavel M, Durán F, Eker S, Lincoln P, Martí-Oliet N, Meseguer J, Talcott C (2003) The maude 2.0 system. In: Nieuwenhuis R (ed) Rewriting techniques and applications (RTA 2003). Lecture notes in computer science, vol 2706. Springer, Berlin, pp 76–87, June 2003
Clavel M, Durán F, Eker S, Lincoln P, Martí-Oliet N, Meseguer J, Talcott C (2007) Maude Manual (Version 2.3), July 2007
Cerone A, Elbegbayan N (2006) Model-checking driven design of interactive systems. In: Cerone A, Curzon P (eds) Proceedings of the first international workshop on formal methods for interactive systems, pp 1–18
Clarke EM, Grumberg O, Peled DA (1999) Model checking. MIT Press, Cambridge
Chi UH (1985) Using model-checking to help discover mode confusions and other automation surprises. IEEE Trans Softw Eng SE-11(8): 671–685
Claveland R, Li T, Sims S (2000) The Concurrency Workbench of the New Century User’s Manual Version 1.2. SUNY at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, New York, June 2000. http://www.cs.sunysb.edu/cwb
Dwyer MB, Carr V, Hines L (1997) Model checking graphical user interface using abstractions. In: Software engineering ù ESEC/FSE’97. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1301. Springer, Berlin, pp 244–261
Dix AJ (1991) Formal methods for interactive systems. Academic Press, New York
Dwyer MB, Tkachuk O (2004) Analyzing interaction orderings with model checking. In: Proc. of ASE 2004, pp 154–163
Hoare CAR (1985) Communicating sequential processes. International series in computer science. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Johnson C (1997) Reasoning about human error and system failure for accident analysis. In: Howard S, Hammond J, Lindgaard G(eds) Human–Computer Interaction INTERACT ’97. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 331–338
Kieras DE, Polson PG (1985) An approach to the formal analysis of user complexity. Int J Man–Mach Stud 22: 365–394
Leveson NG et al (1997) Final report: a demonstration safety analysis of air traffic control software. NASA technical report, 1997. http://sunnyday.mit.edu/papers/dfw2.pdf
Loer K, Harrison M (2003) Model-based formal analysis of temporal aspects in human–computer interaction. In: Proceedings of the HCI2003 workshop on the temporal aspects of tasks
Laird J, Newell A, Rosembloom P (1987) SOAR: an architecture for general intelligence. Artif Intell 33(1): 164
Palanque PA, Bastide R, Paterno F (1997) Formal specification as a tool for objective assessment of safety-critical interactive systems. In: Howard S, Hammond J, Lindgaard G(eds) Human–computer interaction INTERACT ’97. Chapman and Hall, London, pp 323–330
Pnueli A (1977) The temporal logic of programs. In: IEEE symposium on foundations of computer science. Providence, RI, pp 46–57
Paterno F, Santoro C (2001) Integrating model checking and HCI tools to help designers verify user interface properties. In: 7th international workshop, DSV-IS 2000 Limerick, Ireland. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1946. Springer, Berlin, pp 135–150
Rushby J (2002) Using model-checking to help discover mode confusions and other automation surprises. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 75(2): 167–177
Young RM, Green TRG, Simon T (1989) Programmable users models for predictive evaluation of interface design. In: ACM CHI 89 Human Factors in Computing Systems Conference. ACM Press, New York, pp 15–19
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by P. Curzon and D.A. Duce
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Basuki, T.A., Cerone, A., Griesmayer, A. et al. Model-checking user behaviour using interacting components. Form Asp Comp 21, 571–588 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-008-0101-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00165-008-0101-8