Computing Reviews
Today's Issue Hot Topics Search Browse Recommended My Account Log In
Review Help
Systematic automation of scenario-based testing of user interfaces
Campos J., Fayollas C., Martinie C., Navarre D., Palanque P., Pinto M.  EICS 2016 (Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGCHI Symposium on Engineering Interactive Computing Systems, Brussels, Belgium,  Jun 21-24, 2016) 138-148. 2016. Type: Proceedings
Date Reviewed: Aug 18 2016

In May 2016, the driver of a Tesla Model S equipped with the autopilot feature was killed when his vehicle crashed into a tractor-trailer [1]. Tesla confirmed that the vehicle’s autopilot was active and that its brakes were not activated, neither by the driver nor the automatic braking system.

Users of such systems should be protected from similar scenarios caused by malfunction or user error. One approach to testing is based on data collected by early adopters. The more traditional approach is to develop specifications for safety-critical systems, implement the system, and test its performance against the specifications. The latter can be prohibitively expensive, and may delay the introduction of beneficial features.

The authors of this paper propose to reduce expenses and improve testing by increasing the degree of automation through synergistic execution, where a system is validated against its model by running the implementation and the task model side by side and comparing their behavior. A significant drawback is the coverage of scenarios that include user error: normative models only describe the expected behavior of the system, and including possible user errors greatly expands the number of scenarios. The authors introduce the mutation of scenarios, limited to ones that correspond to user errors, such as unintended actions or unsuitable strategies.

They validate their approach by comparing the behavior of a model for an airplane flight control unit against a simulation. While they demonstrate the feasibility, the currently available methods and tools are still very restricted. Combined with the difficulty of creating fully specified models of systems like self-driving vehicles, users will have to live with the risk inherent in using products that are under continuing development.

Reviewer:  Franz Kurfess Review #: CR144694 (1611-0812)
1) Vlasic, B.; Boudette, N. E. As U.S. investigates fatal Tesla crash, company defends autopilot system. New York Times, July 12, 2016,
Bookmark and Share
  Editor Recommended
Featured Reviewer
User Interfaces (D.2.2 ... )
Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE) (D.2.2 ... )
Would you recommend this review?
Other reviews under "User Interfaces": Date
Funology 2: from usability to enjoyment (2nd ed.)
Blythe M., Monk A.,  Springer International Publishing, New York, NY, 2018. 561 pp. Type: Book (978-3-319682-12-9)
Aug 30 2021
A systematic literature review on intelligent user interfaces: preliminary results
Gonçalves T., Kolski C., de Oliveira K., Travassos G., Grislin-Le Strugeon E.  IHM 2019 (Proceedings of the 31st Conference on l’Interaction Homme-Machine, Grenoble, France,  Dec 10-13, 2019) 1-8, 2019. Type: Proceedings
May 14 2020
Self-healing UI: mechanically and electrically self-healing materials for sensing and actuation interfaces
Narumi K., Qin F., Liu S., Cheng H., Gu J., Kawahara Y., Islam M., Yao L.  UIST 2019 (Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, New Orleans, LA,  Oct 20-23, 2019) 293-306, 2019. Type: Proceedings
Jan 23 2020

E-Mail This Printer-Friendly
Send Your Comments
Contact Us
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.   Copyright © 2000-2021 ThinkLoud, Inc.
Terms of Use
| Privacy Policy