SCIENTIA SINICA Informationis, Volume 48 , Issue 4 : 475-484(2018) https://doi.org/10.1360/N112017-00210

Interface paradigm of Bots-based human-computer interaction

More info
  • ReceivedOct 30, 2017
  • AcceptedJan 17, 2018
  • PublishedApr 8, 2018


Funded by










[1] Bruner J, Barlow M. What Are Conversational Bots? Sebastopol: O'Reilly Media Inc, 2016. Google Scholar

[2] Backer V L, Revang M. Four Use Cases for Chatbots in the Enterprise Now. Gartner Report, ID: G00316146, 2017. Google Scholar

[3] Brant K F, Austin T. Hype Cycle for Artificial Intelligence. Gartner Report, ID: G00314732, 2017. Google Scholar

[4] Andrews W. Where You Should Use Artificial Intelligence — and Why. Gartner Report, ID: G00328113, 2017. Google Scholar

[5] Dong J M, Fu L M, Salvendy G. Human-Computer Interaction: User Centered Design and Evaluation. Beijing: Tsinghua University Press, 2002. Google Scholar

[6] Dix A, Finlay J, Abowd G, et al. Human-Computer Interaction. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall, 1993. Google Scholar

[7] Tian F, Mu S, Dai G Z, et al. Research on a pen-based interaction paradigm in Post-WIMP environment. Chinese J Comput, 2004, 27: 977--984. Google Scholar

[8] Dai G Z, Tian F. Pen-based User Interface. Hefei: Press of University of Science and Technology of China, 2008. Google Scholar

[9] Meadows M. I, Avatar: the Culture and Consequences of Having a Second Life. Thousand Oaks: New Riders Press, 2007. Google Scholar

[10] Thacker C P, Mccreight E M, Lampson B W, et al. Alto: a personal computer. In: Computer Structures: Readings and Examples. New York: McGraw-hill, 1979. 549--572. Google Scholar

[11] Williams G. The apple macintosh computer. Byte, 1984. http://www.1000bit.it/support/articoli/apple/mac128.pdf. Google Scholar

[12] Zhu X F, Gu Y L, Cao Y. Study of graphical user interface development technique based on Motif in UNIX. J South Yangtze Univ (Nat Sci Edit), 2002, 1: 38--41. Google Scholar

[13] Koike H.The role of another spatial dimension in software visualization.ACM Trans Inf Syst, 1993, 11: 266--286. Google Scholar

[14] Lv F. Research on reality-based interaction techniques and applications. Dissertation for Ph.D. Degree. Beijing: University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 2012. Google Scholar

[15] Green M, Jacob R. SIGGRAPH '90 Workshop report: software architectures and metaphors for non-WIMP user interfaces. SIGGRAPH Comput Graph, 1991, 25: 229-235 CrossRef Google Scholar

[16] Dam A V. Post-wimp user interfaces. Commun ACM, 1997, 40: 63--67. Google Scholar

[17] Nielsen J. Noncommand user interfaces. Commun ACM, 1993, 36: 82--99. Google Scholar

[18] Satyanarayanan M. Pervasive computing: vision and challenges. IEEE Pers Commun, 2001, 8: 10--17. Google Scholar

[19] Saha D, Mukherjee A. Pervasive computing: a paradigm for the 21st century. Computer, 2003, 36: 25--31. Google Scholar

[20] Waibel A, Vo M T, Duchnowski P. Multimodal interfaces. Artif Intell Rev, 1996, 10: 299-319 CrossRef Google Scholar

[21] Picard R W. Affective Computing. Cambridge: the MIT Press, 1997. Google Scholar

[22] Azuma R, Baillot Y, Behringer R, et al. Recent advances in augmented reality. IEEE Comput Graph Appl, 2001, 21: 34--47. Google Scholar

[23] Azuma R T. A Survey of Augmented Reality. Presence-Teleoperators Virtual Environ, 1997, 6: 355-385 CrossRef Google Scholar

[24] Wigdor D, Wixon D. Brave NUI World: Designing Natural User Interfaces for Touch and Gesture. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, 2011. Google Scholar

[25] Lv F, Tian F, Du Y, et al. NEM: a natural user interface evaluation method based on reality framework. J Comput-Aided Des Comput Graph, 2017, 29: 2076--2082. Google Scholar

[26] Jacob R J K. What is the next generation of human-computer interaction? In: Proceedings of CHI'06 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montréal, 2006. 1707--1710. Google Scholar

[27] Jacob R J K, Girouard A, Hirshfield L M, et al. Reality-based interaction: unifying the new generation of interaction styles. In: Proceedings of CHI'07 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, 2007. 2465--2470. Google Scholar

[28] Jacob R J K, Girouard A, Hirshfield L M, et al. Reality-based interaction: a framework for post-wimp interfaces. In: Proceeding of the 26th Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Florence, 2008. 201--210. Google Scholar

[29] Weizenbaum J. ELIZA---a computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Commun ACM, 1966, 9: 36-45 CrossRef Google Scholar

[30] Nardi B A, Whittaker S, Bradner E. Interaction and outeraction: instant messaging in action. In: Proceedings of ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Philadelphia, 2000. 79--88. Google Scholar

[31] Allworth J. Apple's Siri is as revolutionary as the Mac. 2011. https://hbr.org/2011/10/apples-siri-is-as-revolutionar. Google Scholar

[32] Thakur S. Personalization for Google now: user understanding and application to information recommendation and exploration. In: Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, Boston, 2016. Google Scholar

[33] López G, Quesada L, Guerrero L A. Alexa vs. Siri vs. Cortana vs. Google assistant: a comparison of speech-based natural user interfaces. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, Los Angeles, 2017. 241--250. Google Scholar

[34] Koved L, Selker T. Room with a view (RWAV): a metaphor for interactive computing. 2007. http://www.research.ibm.com/people/k/koved/papers/rwavrc.pdf. Google Scholar

[35] J Coutaz. PAC, an object oriented model for dialog design. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Stuttgart, 1987. 431--436. Google Scholar

[36] Burke B, Austin T, Searle S, et al. Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends for 2017: Conversational Systems. Gartner Report, ID: G00319579, 2017. Google Scholar