Search

Gameful design, including gamification, has proved helpful in increasing user engagement while using interactive systems in various contexts and domains including professional, leisure, healthcare…. The use of game-related elements correspond to the addition of new goals and tasks for the user to perform. In the context of work, users' goals and tasks strongly relate to the users' missions and objectives in the work organization. As part of the tasks may be automated at design time, allocation of tasks between the user and the interactive systems supporting these users' tasks has to be carefully analyzed, elicited and designed, so that the user can reach the objectives and goals assigned with adequate performance and acceptable error rate. This paper argues that the gameful design of interactive systems in the workplace requires precisely identifying and describing automation in work tasks, as well as users' tasks with the game elements. For that purpose, the paper presents a task models based approach that enables to analyze and design automation while applying gameful design. The paper presents an illustration of the approach using the example of an operator performing a monitoring task.

Designing usable Human-Machine Interfaces (HMIs) is a complex activity involving multiple stakeholders with potentially conflicting objectives. ISO 9241 part 11 [1] defines the usability property (composed of contributing factors called efficiency, effectiveness and satisfaction) while ISO 9241 part 210 [2] defines the User Centered Design process which makes explicit involvement of end-users in the various development phases (needs analysis, design, evaluation, ...). Unfortunately, these standards mainly focus on simple, walk-up and use systems such as mobile apps.

ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI); Position paper accepted at workshop on Operationalizing Human-Centered Perspectives in Explainable AI at ACM SIGCHI Conference on Computer Human Interaction (CHI 2021); International audience; Large scale critical interactive systems (e.g. aircraft cockpits, satellite command and control applications…) aim to carry out complex missions. Users of such system usually perform predefined tasks for which they are trained and qualified. Nowadays, critical systems tend to embed an increasing number of on-board sensors, which collect large amounts of data to be interpreted and extrapolated, which tend to make more complex user tasks. Artificial Intelligence (AI) could be a powerful option to support the users in managing their tasks and handling this complexity. However, operationalizing AI in critical interactive systems requires proving that the AI behavior is consistent with user tasks, as well as transparent to the users and to the certification stakeholders. Explainable AI (XAI) is key as it could be a significant mean to satisfy this requirement. Nevertheless, at the same time, XAI will also have to comply with needs and common practices for the design and development of critical interactive systems. This position paper discusses the main challenges for operationalizing XAI in critical interactive systems.

International audience; This position paper proposes the use of human-human collaboration models to study human-automation collaboration. We first present some of most prominent models from psychology and HCI and project their content to identify design rules that could be used to design and evaluate human-automation collaborations. We apply these principles to the workplace of cockpits of large civil aircrafts. • Human-centered computing → Human computer interaction (HCI); Interactive systems and tools

International audience

Introduction : This position paper presents how the engineering of interactive system may be impacted when these systems are designed to be deployed in safety critical contexts. These domains are specific as they are usually driven by constraining standards defining precisely best practices and mandatory processes to be applied. The authors discuss how it is possible to take into account these constraints in real-life domains where critical and non-critical components may coexist. Engineering approaches in this context must jointly exploit formal description techniques (for the critical parts) and standard software production techniques (for the non-critical part). The paper describes how Engineering Interactive Systems in these domains particularly impact design and development processes, systems architectural aspects and developers’ tasks.

International audience; This SIG focuses on the engineering of automation in interactive critical systems. Automation has already been studied in a number of (sub-) disciplines and application fields: design, human factors, psychology, (software) engineering, aviation, health care, games. One distinguishing feature of the area we are focusing on is that in the field of interactive critical systems properties such as reliability, dependability, fault-tolerance are as important as usability, user experience or overall acceptance issues. The SIG targets at two problem areas: first the engineering of the user interaction with (partly-) autonomous systems: how to design, build and assess autonomous behavior, especially in cases where there is a need to represent on the user interface both autonomous and interactive objects. An example of such integration is the representation of an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) (where no direct interaction is possible), together with aircrafts (that have to be instructed by an air traffic controller to avoid the UAV). Second the design and engineering of user interaction in general for autonomous objects/systems (for example a cruise control in a car or an autopilot in an aircraft).

International audience; Formal methods provide support for validation and verification of interactive systems by means of complete and unambiguous description of the envisioned system. They can also be used (for instance in the requirements/needs identification phase) to define precisely what the system should do and how it should meet user needs. If the entire development process in supported by formal methods (for instance as required by DO 178C [7] and its supplement 333 [8]) then classical formal method engineers would argue that the resulting software is defect free. However, events that are beyond the envelope of the specification may occur and trigger unexpected behaviors from the formally specified system resulting in failures. Sources of such failures can be permanent or transient hardware failures, due to (when such systems are deployed in the high atmosphere e.g. aircrafts or spacecrafts) natural faults triggered by alpha-particles from radioactive contaminants in the chips or neutron from cosmic radiation. This position paper proposes a complementary view to formal approaches first by presenting an overview of causes of unexpected events on the system side as well as on the human side and then by discussing approaches that could provide support for taking into account system faults and human errors at design time.

National audience; Cet article décrit une démonstration concernant l’outil logiciel HAMSTERS (Human-centered Assessment and Modeling to Support Task Engineering for Resilient Systems). HAMSTERS est un outil logiciel de modélisation permettant d’éditer, de simuler et d’analyser des modèles de tâches basés sur la notation éponyme. HAMSTERS a été conçu et développé pour les besoins de projets de recherche industriels principalement dans les domaines de l’aéronautique et de l’espace.

International audience; Autonomous behavior like collecting resources is a key element in a variety of games. Managing autonomous behavior in games does not seem to pose problems when playing a game. The area of safety-critical systems has a variety of autonomous behaviors that have to be managed in their user interfaces. Carrying on with previous work about design and engineering critical interactive systems using contributions from gaming research and practice [7][8] this proposal aims to investigate the ability to use a Game Jam as a research method in the area of safety-critical systems, especially on new design issues encountered with (partly) autonomous systems.

International audience; Operators of critical interactive systems are trained and qualified before being allowed to operate critical systems in “real” contexts. However, during operation, things might happen differently from during training sessions as system failures may occur and operators may make errors when interacting with the system. Both events may also be cross-related as a misunderstanding of a system failure can lead to an erroneous subsequent operation.The proposed approach focuses on assessing the impact that potential failures and/or human errors may have on human performance. This analysis targets the design and development phases of the system, when user tasks are analyzed in order to build the right system (i.e. corresponding to the users’ needs and activities they have to perform on the system). We use a task modeling notation for describing precisely operators’ activities as well as information, knowledge and objects required for performing these activities. These task models are then augmented into several variants through integration of potential system failure patterns (with associated recovery tasks) and human error patterns. The produced deviated task models are used to assess the impact of the task deviation on the operators’ performance.

International audience; This article describes a model of automation variability propagation in a complex networks. A modelling context constituted of network-based model and socio - technical system fundamental trade-offs is used to structured a four level propagation model

International audience; Large-Scale Socio-Technical Systems, such as Air Traffic Management (ATM), are organizations where different interconnected systems work together to achieve a common goal. Analysis of variability is particularly challenging in these systems of systems due to the non-linear and complex interactions among social and technical functions. This paper proposes a systematic approach able to represent and to reason about the variability of such socio-technical systems. The proposed approach is based on the synergistic use of 3 models able to represent the variability from different points of view. This federation of models focusses the analysis on the relevant aspects of the systems of systems at different levels of granularity. The models taken into account for the representation of system variability are FRAM [12] focusing on organizational functions, HAMSTERS [17], which is centred on human goals and activities and ICO [20] which is dedicated to the representation of systems' behaviour (including the user interface). The paper presents a detailed development process describing how the models are built and analysed. This process is exemplified on a case study involving the AMAN (Arrival MANager) system.

Available on: http://www.sesarinnovationdays.eu/papers; International audience; Increased automation is one of the main changes foreseen by SESAR in ATM. This will pose new challenges including possible automation degradation. The premise for the SPAD project is that degradation of systems automation is unavoidable due either to internal (e.g. human, software or system failure) or external (e.g. weather, strikes, malicious behaviors) events (or both). There is thus a need to understand, monitor and manage how automation degradation of a single system may propagate to the overall ATM system, and to define ways to confine and absorb degradation problems, with and without human contribution. There is also a need to estimate the implications of degradations for the overall ATM system performances. These aspects will be investigated by SPAD, which has the following aims: 1) understanding, modelling and estimating the propagation of automation degradation in ATM; 2) estimating the consequences of automation degradation on ATM performances; 3) supporting an effective intervention for the containment of automation degradation. This paper presents the early findings by the SPAD project after 6 months of work and presents the investigations that will be carried out in the next months.

Integrating more and more automation in systems is the classical approach followed by designers and engineers to support operators in the command and control tasks of more and more complex systems. However, designing automation and designing interfaces for operating systems that are (partly) automated is a very complex activity altering in depth the development process of these systems. In the early days such automation was rather limited and thus easier to manage even though bad designs have been widely and frequently reported (e.g. [12, 15]). Entertainment computing and gaming is a large research and industrial domain receiving an ever growing interest that has been facing such issues since the very first games. Early on games were involving autonomous objects and (later) automation-based tools for supporting (and evoking) extremely demanding and challenging cognitive, perceptive and motor activities. This paper reports on work that has been carried out in the area of games and provides a set of design guidelines, processes and evaluation techniques applicable to the domain of safety-critical interactive command and control systems.

Arguments to support validity of most contributions in the field of human–computer interaction are based on detailed results of empirical studies involving cohorts of tested users confronted with a set of tasks performed on a prototype version of an interactive system. This chapter presents how the Interactive Cooperative Objects (ICO) formal models of the entire interactive system can support predictive and summative performance evaluation activities by exploiting the models. Predictive performance evaluation is supported by ICO formal models of interactive systems enriched with perceptive, cognitive, and motoric information about the users. Summative usability evaluation is addressed at the level of the software system, which is able to exhaustively log all the user actions performed on the interactive system The articulation of these two evaluation approaches is demonstrated on a case study from the avionics domain with a step-by-step tutorial on how to apply the approach.