Skip to main content Link Menu Expand (external link) Document Search Copy Copied
HCI Systems

Week 02: On Interactive Systems

  1. Dubberly, H., Pangaro, P., & Haque, U. (2009). ON MODELING What is interaction? are there different types?. interactions, 16(1), 69-75. LINK
  2. Myers, B., Hudson, S. E., & Pausch, R. (2000). Past, present, and future of user interface software tools. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 7(1), 3-28. LINK
  3. Martelaro, N., & Ju, W. (2018). Cybernetics and the design of the user experience of AI systems. Interactions, 25(6), 38-41. LINK

Week 03: Sensing Users

  1. Obrist, M., Velasco, C., Vi, C., Ranasinghe, N., Israr, A., Cheok, A., … & Gopalakrishnakone, P. (2016). Sensing the future of HCI: Touch, taste, and smell user interfaces. interactions, 23(5), 40-49. LINK
  2. Laput, G., Zhang, Y., & Harrison, C. (2017, May). Synthetic sensors: Towards general-purpose sensing. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 3986-3999). LINK
  3. Ahuja, K., Kim, D., Xhakaj, F., Varga, V., Xie, A., Zhang, S., … & Agarwal, Y. (2019). EduSense: Practical classroom sensing at Scale. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies, 3(3), 1-26. LINK

Optional Readings

  1. Dubberly, H. (2009). ON MODELING Models of models. Interactions, 16(3), 54-60.Dubberly (2009). LINK
  2. Dubberly, H., & Evenson, S. (2008). On modeling The analysis-systhesis bridge model. interactions, 15(2), 57-61. LINK

Week 04: Modeling & Tracking Users

  1. Ballendat, T., Marquardt, N., & Greenberg, S. (2010). Proxemic interaction: designing for a proximity and orientation-aware environment. In ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces (pp. 121-130). [LINK]
  2. Lane, N., Mohammod, M., Lin, M., Yang, X., Lu, H., Ali, S., … & Campbell, A. (2012, April). Bewell: A smartphone application to monitor, model and promote wellbeing. In 5th international ICST conference on pervasive computing technologies for healthcare. [LINK]
  3. Zhang, X., Brown, H. F., & Shankar, A. (2016, May). Data-driven personas: Constructing archetypal users with clickstreams and user telemetry. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 5350-5359). [LINK]

Week 05: Personalization & Adaptation

  1. Szafir, D., & Mutlu, B. (2012). Pay attention! Designing adaptive agents that monitor and improve user engagement. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 11-20). [LINK]
  2. Gajos, K. Z., Hurst, A., & Findlater, L. (2012). Personalized dynamic accessibility. Interactions, 19(2), 69-73. [LINK]
  3. Todi, K., Bailly, G., Leiva, L., & Oulasvirta, A. (2021, May). Adapting user interfaces with model-based reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-13). [LINK]

Week 06: Learning & Prediction

  1. Huang, C. M., & Mutlu, B. (2016). Anticipatory robot control for efficient human-robot collaboration. In 2016 11th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI) (pp. 83-90). IEEE. [LINK]
  2. Horvitz, E., Breese, J., Heckerman, D., Hovel, D., & Rommelse, K. (1998, July). The lumière project: Bayesian user modeling for inferring the goals and needs of software users. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth conference on Uncertainty in artificial intelligence (pp. 256-265). [LINK]
  3. Yang, R., & Newman, M. W. (2013, September). Learning from a learning thermostat: lessons for intelligent systems for the home. In Proceedings of the 2013 ACM international joint conference on Pervasive and ubiquitous computing (pp. 93-102). [LINK]

Week 07: Conversational Interaction

  1. Clark, L., Pantidi, N., Cooney, O., Doyle, P., Garaialde, D., Edwards, J., … & Cowan, B. R. (2019, May). What makes a good conversation? Challenges in designing truly conversational agents. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1-12). [LINK]
  2. Peltason, J., & Wrede, B. (2011). The curious robot as a case-study for comparing dialog systems. AI magazine, 32(4), 85-99. [LINK]
  3. Axelsson, A., Buschmeier, H., & Skantze, G. (2022). Modeling feedback in interaction with conversational agents—a review. Frontiers in Computer Science, 4. [LINK]

Week 08: Spring Break!

Week 09: Direct Manipulation

  1. Shneiderman, B., & Maes, P. (1997). Direct manipulation vs. interface agents. interactions, 4(6), 42-61. [LINK]
  2. Pick one:
    1. Jacobs, J., Gogia, S., Mĕch, R., & Brandt, J. R. (2017, May). Supporting expressive procedural art creation through direct manipulation. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 6330-6341). [LINK]
    2. Shugrina, M., Zhang, W., Chevalier, F., Fidler, S., & Singh, K. (2019, May). Color builder: A direct manipulation interface for versatile color theme authoring. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-12). [LINK]
  3. Pick one:
    1. Vogel, D., & Baudisch, P. (2007, April). Shift: a technique for operating pen-based interfaces using touch. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 657-666). [LINK]
    2. Sato, M., Poupyrev, I., & Harrison, C. (2012, May). Touché: enhancing touch interaction on humans, screens, liquids, and everyday objects. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 483-492). [LINK]

Week 10: Multimodal Interaction

  1. Pick one:
    1. Oviatt, S. (2007). Multimodal interfaces. The human-computer interaction handbook, 439-458. [LINK]
    2. Turk, M. (2014). Multimodal interaction: A review. Pattern recognition letters, 36, 189-195.[LINK]

Week 11: Context-Aware Interaction

  1. Pick one:
    1. Dey, A. K., Abowd, G. D., & Salber, D. (2001). A conceptual framework and a toolkit for supporting the rapid prototyping of context-aware applications. Human–Computer Interaction, 16(2-4), 97-166. [LINK]
    2. Perera, C., Zaslavsky, A., Christen, P., & Georgakopoulos, D. (2013). Context aware computing for the internet of things: A survey. IEEE communications surveys & tutorials, 16(1), 414-454. [LINK]

Week 12: Mixed-Initiative Interaction

  1. Allen, J. E., Guinn, C. I., & Horvtz, E. (1999). Mixed-initiative interaction. IEEE Intelligent Systems and their Applications, 14(5), 14-23. [LINK]
  2. Amershi, S., Weld, D., Vorvoreanu, M., Fourney, A., Nushi, B., Collisson, P., … & Horvitz, E. (2019, May). Guidelines for human-AI interaction. In Proceedings of the 2019 chi conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1-13). [LINK]

Week 13: Visual Representations

  1. Shneiderman, B. (2003). Why not make interfaces better than 3D reality?. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 23(6), 12-15.[LINK]
  2. Bowman, D. A., Coquillart, S., Froehlich, B., Hirose, M., Kitamura, Y., Kiyokawa, K., & Stuerzlinger, W. (2008). 3d user interfaces: New directions and perspectives. IEEE computer graphics and applications, 28(6), 20-36. [LINK]
  3. Van Krevelen, D. W. F., & Poelman, R. (2010). A survey of augmented reality technologies, applications and limitations. International journal of virtual reality, 9(2), 1-20. [LINK]

Week 14: Embodied Representations

McDonnell, R., & Mutlu, B. (2021). Appearance. The handbook on socially interactive agents: 20 years of research on embodied conversational agents, intelligent virtual agents, and social robotics volume 1: Methods, behavior, cognition, 105-146. [LINK]

Optional Readings

Deng, E., Mutlu, B., & Mataric, M. J. (2019). Embodiment in socially interactive robots. Foundations and Trends® in Robotics, 7(4), 251-356. [LINK]

Week 15: Evaluation & Presentation

  1. Albert, B., & Tullis, T. (2022). Chapter 3: Planning. Measuring the User Experience: Collecting, Analyzing, and Presenting UX Metrics. Morgan Kaufmann.[LINK]
  2. Lazar, J., Feng, J. H., & Hochheiser, H. (2017). Chapter 10: Usability Testing. Research methods in human-computer interaction. Morgan Kaufmann. [LINK]
  3. Levin, R., & Redell, D. D. (1988). An evaluation of the ninth sosp submissions or how (and how not) to write a good systems paper. ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, 22(5), 264-266. [LINK]

Copyright © 2023 Professor Bilge Mutlu