logo

SCIENTIA SINICA Informationis, Volume 48 , Issue 4 : 361-375(2018) https://doi.org/10.1360/N112017-00221

Thoughts on human-computer interaction in the age of artificial intelligence

More info
  • ReceivedNov 3, 2017
  • AcceptedJan 4, 2018
  • PublishedFeb 27, 2018

Abstract


Funded by

国家重点研发计划(2016YFB10011405)

国家自然科学基金(61232013)

国家自然科学基金(61422212)

国家自然科学基金(61402435)

国家自然科学基金(61572479)

中国科学院前沿科学重点研究计划(QYZDY-SSW-JSC041)


References

[1] Dai G Z, Tian F. Pen-based User Interface. Hefei: University of Science and Technology of China Press, 2014. Google Scholar

[2] Licklider J C R. Man-Computer Symbiosis. IRE Trans Hum Factors Electron, 1960, HFE-1: 4-11 CrossRef Google Scholar

[3] Hewett T T, Baecker R, Card S, et al. ACM SIGCHI Curricula for Human-Computer Interaction. New York: ACM, 1992. Google Scholar

[4] Myers B A. A brief history of human-computer interaction technology. Interactions, 1998, 5: 44--54. Google Scholar

[5] Bush V. As we may think. SIGPC Note, 1979, 1: 36-44 CrossRef Google Scholar

[6] Sutherland I E. Sketchpad: a man-machine graphical communication system. In: Proceedings of Spring Joint Computer Conference, Detroit, 1964. Google Scholar

[7] Eskins D, Sanders W H. The multiple-asymmetric-utility system model: a framework for modeling cyber-human systems. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Quantitative Evaluation of Systems, Aachen, 2011. Google Scholar

[8] Kay A, Goldberg A. Personal dynamic media. IEEE Comput, 1977, 10: 31--41. Google Scholar

[9] Weiser M. The computer for the twenty-first century. Sci Am, 1991, 265: 94--104. Google Scholar

[10] Weiser M. Some computer science issues in ubiquitous computing. Commun ACM, 1993, 36: 75-84 CrossRef Google Scholar

[11] Jacob R J, Girouard A, Hirshfield L M, et al. Reality-based interaction: a framework for post-WIMP interfaces. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Florence, 2008. Google Scholar

[12] 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

[13] Dai G Z, Wang H. Physical object icons buttons gesture (PIBG): a new interaction paradigm with pen. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Xiamen, 2004. 11--20. Google Scholar

[14] Ishii H. Tangible bits: beyond pixels. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction, Bonn, 2008. Google Scholar

[15] Ishii H, Lakatos D, Bonanni L, et al. Radical atoms: beyond tangible bits, toward transformable materials. Interactions, 2012, 19: 38--51. Google Scholar

[16] Olson J R, Olson G M. The Growth of Cognitive Modeling in Human-Computer Interaction Since GOMS. Human-Comput Interaction, 1990, 5: 221-265 CrossRef Google Scholar

[17] Card S K, Newell A, Moran T P. The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. New York: CRC Press, 2008. Google Scholar

[18] Payne S, Green T R G. Task-Action Grammars: A Model of the Mental Representation of Task Languages. Human-Comp Interaction, 1986, 2: 93-133 CrossRef Google Scholar

[19] Laird J E, Newell A, Rosenbloom P S. SOAR: An architecture for general intelligence. Artificial Intelligence, 1987, 33: 1-64 CrossRef Google Scholar

[20] Anderson J R. Rules of the Mind. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1993. Google Scholar

[21] Zhou F, Wong V, Sekuler R. Multi-sensory integration of spatio-temporal segmentation cues: one plus one does not always equal two.. Exp Brain Res, 2007, 180: 641-654 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[22] Kieras D E, Wood S D, Meyer D E. Predictive engineering models based on the EPIC architecture for a multimodal high-performance human-computer interaction task. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact, 1997, 4: 230-275 CrossRef Google Scholar

[23] Hartson H R, Hix D. Human-computer interface development. ACM Comput Surv, 1986, 21: 5--92. Google Scholar

[24] Mirnig A G, Meschtscherjakov A, Wurhofer D, et al. A formal analysis of the ISO 9241-210 definition of user experience. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Seoul, 2015. 437--450. Google Scholar

[25] Hassenzahl M, Tractinsky N. User experience - a research agenda. Behaviour Inf Tech, 2006, 25: 91-97 CrossRef Google Scholar

[26] Roto V, Hassenzahl M, Vermeeren A, et al. Understanding, scoping and defining user experience: a survey approach. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Boston, 2009. 719--728. Google Scholar

[27] Toffler A. Future shock. Am J Sociol, 1970, 429: 104. Google Scholar

[28] Csikszentmihalyi M. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1975. Google Scholar

[29] Law E L C, van Schaik P. Modelling user experience - An agenda for research and practice. Interacting Comput, 2010, 22: 313-322 CrossRef Google Scholar

[30] Norman D A. Natural user interfaces are not natural. Interactions, 2010, 17: 6--10. Google Scholar

[31] Norman D A, Nielsen J. The way I see itGestural interfaces. interactions, 2010, 17: 46-49 CrossRef Google Scholar

[32] Bi X J, Li Y, Zhai S M. FFitts law: modeling finger touch with fitts' law. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Paris, 2013. 1363--1372. Google Scholar

[33] Fitts P M. The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement.. J Exp Psychology-General, 1992, 121: 262-269 CrossRef Google Scholar

[34] Schneider D W, Anderson J R. A memory-based model of Hick's law.. Cognitive Psychology, 2011, 62: 193-222 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[35] Miller G A. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information.. Psychological Rev, 1956, 63: 81-97 CrossRef Google Scholar

[36] Ritter F E, Baxter G D, Churchill E F. Foundations for Designing User-Centered Systems. Berlin: Springer, 2014. Google Scholar

[37] Myers B, Hudson S E, Pausch R. Past, present, and future of user interface software tools. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact, 2000, 7: 3-28 CrossRef Google Scholar

[38] Dan R O, Klemmer S R. The future of user interface design tools. In: Proceedings of CHI'05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Portland, 2005. 2134--2135. Google Scholar

[39] Glonek G, Pietruszka M. Natural user interfaces (NUI): review. J Appl Comput Sci, 2012, 20: 27--45. Google Scholar

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

[41] Mann S. Intelligent Image Processing. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons, 2001. Google Scholar

[42] Liu W Y. Natural user interface- next mainstream product user interface. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computer-Aided Industrial Design and Conceptual Design, Yiwu, 2011. Google Scholar

[43] 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

[44] Lv F, Zhang H Q, Hou W J, et al. A natural user interface feedback design method based on reality framework. J Beijing Univ Posts Telecommun (Soc Sci Edit), 2015, 17: 14--21. Google Scholar

[45] Shneiderman B. Technology-mediated social participation: the next 25 years of HCI challenges. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Design and Development Approaches, Orlando, 2011. Google Scholar

[46] Preece J, Shneiderman B. The Reader-to-Leader Framework: Motivating Technology-Mediated Social Participation. THCI, 2009, 1: 13-32 CrossRef Google Scholar

[47] Thomas J C, Kellogg W A. Minimizing ecological gaps in interface design. IEEE Softw, 1989, 6: 78--86. Google Scholar

[48] Landauer T K. Let's get real: a position paper on the role of cognitive psychology in the design of humanly useful and usable systems. Des Interact, 1991, 33: 60--73. Google Scholar

[49] Shove E, Pantzar M, Watson M. The dynamics of social practice: everyday life and how it changes. Acta Sociologica, 2012, 65: 1511--1514. Google Scholar

[50] Pierce J, Strengers Y, Sengers P, et al. Introduction to the special issue on practice-oriented approaches to sustainable HCI. ACM Trans Comput-Human Interact, 2013, 20: 1--8. Google Scholar

[51] Bidwell N J, Siya M, Marsden G, et al. Walking and the social life of solar charging in rural africa. ACM Trans Comput-Human Interact, 2013, 20: 499--505. Google Scholar

[52] Wakkary R, Desjardins A, Hauser S, et al. A sustainable design fiction: green practices. ACM Trans Comput-Human Interact, 2013, 20: 23. Google Scholar

[53] Tomlinson B, Blevis E, Nardi B, et al. Collapse informatics and practice: theory, method, and design. ACM Trans Comput-Human Interact, 2013, 20: 24. Google Scholar

[54] Pink S, Mackley K L, Mitchell V, et al. Applying the lens of sensory ethnography to sustainable HCI. ACM Trans Comput-Human Interact, 2013, 20: 499--505. Google Scholar

[55] Disalvo C, Watson M. Commentaries on the special issue on practice-oriented approaches to sustainable HCI. ACM Trans Comput-Human Interact, 2013, 20: 666--684. Google Scholar

[56] Eskins D, Sanders W H. The multiple-asymmetric-utility system model: a framework for modeling cyber-human systems. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Quantitative Evaluation of Systems, Aachen, 2011. Google Scholar

[57] Rehman M, Liew C, Wah T. Mining personal data using smartphones and wearable devices: a survey.. Sensors, 2015, 15: 4430-4469 CrossRef PubMed Google Scholar

[58] Abowd G D, Mynatt E D. Charting past, present, and future research in ubiquitous computing. ACM Trans Comput-Hum Interact, 2000, 7: 29-58 CrossRef Google Scholar

[59] Greenfield A. Everyware: the Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing. Berkeley: Peachpit Press, 2006. Google Scholar

[60] Goertz W, Reinhart M. Hype Cycle for Human-Machine Interface. Stanford: Gartner, 2015. Google Scholar

[61] Tong T X. From “man-machine war" to man-machine symbiosis. Study Dialectics Nat, 1997. Google Scholar

[62] Mccarthy J. Artificial intelligence: a general survey. Artif Intel, 1974, 5: 385--392. Google Scholar

[63] Grudin J. AI and HCI: Two Fields Divided by a Common Focus. AIMag, 2010, 30: 48-57 CrossRef Google Scholar

qqqq

Contact and support