Applying Graph Theory to Interaction Design

  • Harold Thimbleby
  • Jeremy Gow
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4940)

Abstract

Graph theory provides a substantial resource for a diverse range of quantitative and qualitative usability measures that can be used for evaluating recovery from error, informing design tradeoffs, probing topics for user training, and so on.

Graph theory is a straight-forward, practical and flexible way to implement real interactive systems. Hence, graph theory complements other approaches to formal HCI, such as theorem proving and model checking, which have a less direct relation to interaction.

This paper gives concrete examples based on the analysis of a real non-trivial interactive device, a medical syringe pump, itself modelled as a graph. New ideas to HCI (such as small world graphs) are introduced, which may stimulate further research.

References

  1. 1.
    Cairns, P., Jones, M., Thimbleby, H.: Usability analysis with markov models. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 8(2), 99–132 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chartrand, C., Lesniak, L.: Graphs & digraphs. Chapman & Hall, Boca Raton (1996)MATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gansner, E.R., North, S.C.: An open graph visualization system and its applications to software engineering. Software—Practice and Experience 30(11), 1203–1233 (2000)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gould, J.D., Lewis, C.: Designing for usability: Key principles and what designers think. Communications of the ACM 28(3), 300–311 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Graseby Medical Ltd. 9500 Ambulatory Infusion Pump for Epidural Analgesia: Instruction Manual (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Harel, D., Politi, M.: Modeling Reactive Systems with Statecharts. McGraw-Hill, New York (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Knuth, D.E.: The Stanford GraphBase. Addison Wesley, Reading (1994)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Loer, K.: Model-based Automated Analysis for Dependable Interactive Systems. PhD thesis, Dept of Computer Science, University of York, UK (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Myers, B.: Past, present, and future of user interface software tools. In: Carroll, J.M. (ed.) Human-Computer Interaction in the New Millenium. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Parnas, D.L.: On the use of transition diagrams in the design of a user interface for an interactive computer system. In: Proceedings 24th. ACM National Conference, pp. 379–385 (1964)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Payne, S.J., Squibb, H.R., Howes, A.: The nature of device models: The yoked state space hypothesis and some experiments with text editors. Human-Computer Interaction 5, 415–444 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pemmaraju, S., Skiena, S.: Computational discrete mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thimbleby, H.: Combining systems and manuals. In: BCS Conference on Human-Computer Interaction VIII, pp. 479–488. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1993)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Thimbleby, H.: Formulating usability. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin 26(2), 59–64 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thimbleby, H.: Permissive user interfaces. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54(3), 333–350 (2001)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thimbleby, H.: The directed chinese postman problem. Software—Practice & Experience 33(11), 1081–1096 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thimbleby, H., Addison, M.A.: Manuals as structured programs. In: Cockton, G., Draper, S., Weir, G. (eds.) People and Computers IX, Proceedings of HCI 1994, pp. 67–79. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Thimbleby, H., Addison, M.A.: Intelligent adaptive assistance and its automatic generation. Interacting with Computers 8(1), 51–68 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thimbleby, H., Ladkin, P.B.: A proper explanation when you need one. In: Kirby, M., Dix, A., Finlay, J. (eds.) People and Computers X, Proceedings of HCI 1995, pp. 107–118 (1995)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wasserman, A.I.: Extending state transition diagrams for the specification of human-computer interaction. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 11(8), 699–713 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Watts, D.J., Strogatz, S.H.: Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393, 440–442 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harold Thimbleby
    • 1
  • Jeremy Gow
    • 2
  1. 1.University of SwanseaUK
  2. 2.University College LondonUK

Personalised recommendations