skip to main content
10.1145/3206505.3206562acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesaviConference Proceedingsconference-collections
poster

A tangible-programming technology supporting end-user development of smart-environments

Published:29 May 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

In recent years, smart objects are increasingly pervading the environments we live in. For HCI researchers, an important challenge is how non-technical users can establish the behavior of such devices. This poster presents a new technology implementing a tangible-programming paradigm, which allows non-programmers to synchronize the behavior of ecologies of smart objects, thus determining the creation and customization of smart environments.

References

  1. Ashton, K. 2009. That 'internet of things' thing. RFID journal, 22, 7 (2009), 97-114.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Atzori, L., Iera, A., and Morabito, G. 2010. The Internet of Things: A survey. The International Journal of Computer and Computer Networks, 54, 15 (2010), 2787-2805. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Coronado, M. and Iglesias, C.A. 2016. Task Automation Services: Automation for the Masses. IEEE Internet Computing, 20, 1 (2016), 52-58. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Cabitza, F., Fogli, D., Lanzilotti, R., and Piccinno, A. 2016. Rule-based tools for the configuration of ambient intelligence systems: a comparative user study. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 75, 248 (2016), 1-21. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Pane, J.F., Ratanamahatana, C.A., and Myers, B.A. 2001. Studying the language and structure in non-programmers' solutions to programming problems. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54, 2 (2001), 237-264. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Desolda, G., Ardito, C., and Matera, M. 2017. Empowering end users to customize their smart environments: model, composition paradigms and domain-specific tools. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 24, 2 (2017), 52 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Ardito, C., Costabile, M.F., Desolda, G., Lanzilotti, R., Matera, M., and Picozzi, M. 2014. Visual Composition of Data Sources by End Users. In Proc. International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 257-260. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Ardito, C., Costabile, M.F., Desolda, G., Latzina, M., and Matera, M. 2015. Making Mashups Actionable Through Elastic Design Principles. In: End-User Development - Is-EUD 2015, P. DÍAZ, V. PIPEK, C. ARDITO, C. JENSEN, I. AEDO and A. BODEN Eds. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer Verlag, 236-241.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Ardito, C., Bottoni, P., Costabile, M.F., Desolda, G., Matera, M., Piccinno, A., and Picozzi, M. 2013. Enabling End Users to Create, Annotate and Share Personal Information Spaces. In: End-User Development - Is-EUD 2013, Y. DITTRICH, M. BURNETT, A. MØRCH and D. REDMILES Eds. LCNS 7897. Springer Verlag, 40--55.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Desolda, G., Ardito, C., and Matera, M. 2015. EFESTO: A platform for the End-User Development of Interactive Workspaces for Data Exploration. In: Rapid Mashup Development Tools - Rapid Mashup Challenge in ICWE 2015, F. DANIEL and C. PAUTASSO Eds. Communications in Computer and Information Science. Springer Verlag, 63 - 81.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Petrelli, D. and Lechner, M. 2014. The meSch project - Material EncounterS with digital Cultural Heritage: Reusing existing digital resources in the creation of novel forms of visitor's experiences. In Proc. International Committee for Documentation of ICOM (CIDOC '14).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Risseeuw, M., Cavada, D., Not, E., Zancanaro, M., Marshall, M., Petrelli, D., and Kubitza, T. 2016. An authoring environment for smart objects in museums: the meSch approach. In Proc. Workshop on Smart Ecosystems cReation by Visual dEsign (SERVE '16), CEUR-WS, 25-30.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Zancanaro, M., Not, E., Petrelli, D., Marshall, M., van Dijk, T., Risseeuw, M., van Dijk, D., Venturini, A., Cavada, D., and Kubitza, T. 2015. Recipes for tangible and embodied visit experiences. In Proc. Museums and the Web conference (MW '15).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Ardito, C., Buono, P., Costabile, M.F., Lanzilotti, R., and Pederson, T. 2007. Mobile games to foster the learning of history at archaeological sites. In Proc. Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VLHCC). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, 81-86. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Ardito, C., Costabile, M.F., and Lanzilotti, R. 2010. Gameplay on a multitouch screen to foster learning about historical sites. In Proc. International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (AVI). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 75-78. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Bianchi, A., Caivano, D., and Visaggio, G. 2000. Method and process for iterative reengineering of data in a legacy system. In Proc. Working Conference on Reverse Engineering (RE '00), 86-96. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Lamancha, B.P., Polo, M., Caivano, D., Piattini, M., and Visaggio, G. 2013. Automated generation of test oracles using a model-driven approach. Information and Software Technology, 55, 2 (2013), 301-319. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Ardito, C., Buono, P., Desolda, G., and Matera, M. 2017. From smart objects to smart experiences: An end-user development approach. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 114 (2017/12/19/2017), 51-68.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. UBI Interactive. http://www.ubi-interactive.com/. Last access: April 12th, 2018Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. SPRITS. https://github.com/tommasoturchi/SPRITS. Last access: April 12th, 2018Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Turchi, T., Malizia, A., and Dix, A. 2017. TAPAS: A tangible End-User Development tool supporting the repurposing of Pervasive Displays. Journal of Visual Languages & Computing, 39 (2017/04/01/2017), 66-77. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Ardito, C., Buono, P., Costabile, M.F., and Desolda, G. 2015. Interaction with large displays: a survey. ACM Computing Survey, 47, 3 (2015), 1-38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Bellucci, A., Malizia, A., and Aedo, I. 2014. Light on horizontal interactive surfaces: Input space for tabletop computing. ACM Comput. Surv., 46, 3 (2014), 1-42. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Ardito, C., Buono, P., Costabile, M.F., Lanzilotti, R., and Simeone, A.L. 2009. Comparing low cost input devices for interacting with 3D Virtual Environments. In Proc. International Conference on Human System Interactions (HSI '09), 292-297. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. A tangible-programming technology supporting end-user development of smart-environments

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      AVI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces
      May 2018
      430 pages
      ISBN:9781450356169
      DOI:10.1145/3206505

      Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 29 May 2018

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • poster

      Acceptance Rates

      AVI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate19of77submissions,25%Overall Acceptance Rate107of408submissions,26%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader