190 likes | 300 Views
Designing for the Invisible. User-Centered Design of Infrastructure Awareness Systems. Juan David Hincapié-Ramos – jdhr@itu.dk Aurélien Tabard – auta@itu.dk Jakob E. Bardram – bardram@itu.dk. Mini-Grid. 2. Infrastructures. Infrastructures are Invisible! Problems of Invisibility
E N D
Designing for the Invisible User-Centered Design of Infrastructure Awareness Systems Juan David Hincapié-Ramos – jdhr@itu.dkAurélien Tabard – auta@itu.dkJakob E. Bardram – bardram@itu.dk
Infrastructures Infrastructures are Invisible! Problems of Invisibility • Use (trust) • Adoption • Capacity (Mini-Grid) Vizualizations Seamful Design Intelligibility 3
Designing GridOrbit Problems for Design • Future Workshop • Paper Protoryping • Short Iterations –Evaluations • Designing for the Invisible • Lack of understanding • Nature of the Infrastructure • Characteristis • Potential 5
AMCard Technique AM Card matching of the users’ interests with the information the infrastructure awareness system can provide 6
Infrastructure Awareness Model O NimbusWhat the entity projects about itself Focus:What the entity is interested in 7
A A B 8
IA U I 9
AMCard Technique Nimbus Cards IA The infrastructure’s features U I Focus Cards The users’ interests 10
Inspiration Cards Picture taken from the original paper: Halskov, K. and Dalsgård, P. 2006. Inspiration card workshops. In Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Designing interactive Systems (University Park, PA, USA, June 26 - 28, 2006). DIS '06. ACM, New York, NY, 2-11. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1142405.1142409 11
Infrastructure Critique, Implications for Redesign User Focus Cards Fieldwork User Focus Cards AMC Workshop Design Concept+ Closure Infrastructure Awareness Prototype Infrastructure Nimbus Cards The InfAwareness System Infrastructure Awareness System’s Features Technique Stages Design Presentation Matching Closure 12
AMC – Design 13
AMC – Closure • 15 groups • 11 matches • 4 missed • 13 cards discarted • 9 focus • 4 nimbus Matched The interests can be met Missed Either interests orinfrastructure are insufficient Discarded Irrelevant for the solution 18
Results • Relevant: machines and people associated to them No Relevant: the details of task distribution. A • To evaluate how relevant is the information displayed by infrastructure awareness systems. • Algorithms, input data and parameters B • To identify which of the users interests infrastructures awareness systems do not take into account. C • To identify elements of re-design in the infrastructures themselves so as to improve their adoptability. • Task execution results (numeric or graphical) 19
Closure Analisys • Which of the infrastructure features being shown, but not relevant (e.g. bidding activity); • Which of the infrastructure features not being shown, but relevant (e.g. the data used to execute a task); • Which elements of interest the awareness system could display to engage people even though not supported by the infrastructure (e.g. latest publications). • Which elements of the infrastructure were missing to answer users’ interests (e.g. sharing of results).