skip to main content
10.1145/302979.303127acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Getting more out of programming-by-demonstration

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 May 1999Publication History

ABSTRACT

Programming-by-demonstration (PBD) can be used to create tools and methods that eliminate the need to learn difficult computer languages. Gamut is a PBD tool that nonprogrammers can use to create a broader range of interactive software, including games, simulations, and educational software, than they can with other PBD tools. To do this, Gamut provides advanced interaction techniques that make it easier for a developer to express all aspects of an application. These techniques include a simplified way to demonstrate new examples, called nudges, and a way to highlight objects to show they are important. Also, Gamut includes new objects and metaphors like the deck-of-cards metaphor for demonstrating collections of objects and randomness, guide objects for demonstrating relationships that the system would find too difficult to guess, and temporal ghosts which simplify showing relationships with the recent past. These techniques were tested in a formal setting with nonprogrammers to evaluate their effectiveness.

References

  1. 1.Authorware. Authorware Inc. 8400 Normandale Lake Blvd., Suite 430, Minneapolis MN 55437, 612-912-8555, 1991.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.B. Budge. Pinball Construction Set. Exidy Software.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.Corel Click & Create. Corel Corporation and Europress Software Ltd. 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.G.L. Fisher, D. E. Busse, D. A. Wolber. "Adding Rule-Based Reasoning to a Demonstrational Interface Builder" Proceedings of UIST'92, pp 89-97. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. 5.M. Frank. Model-Based User interface Design by Demonstration and by Interview. Ph.D. thesis. Graphics, Visualization & Usability Center, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6.L. Grimm, D. Caswell, and L. Kirkpatrick. Playroom. Broderbund Software, 500 Redwood Blvd., Novato, CA 94948-6121, 1992.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.HyperCard. Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA, 1993.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.Macromedia, Director, 600 Townsend Street, San Francisco, CA 94103, [email protected], http://www.macromedia.com/, 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.D. Maulsby, I. Witten. "Inducing Procedures in a Direct- Manipulation Environment." Proceedings SIGCHI'89, April, 1989. pp. 57-62. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.D. Maulsby. Instructible Agents. Ph.D. thesis. Department of Computer Science, Univ. of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, June 1994. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 11.R.G. McDaniel, B.A. Myers. "Building Applications Using Only Demonstration." Proceedings oflUl'98, pp 109-116. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. 12.B. A. Myers et al. "The Amulet Environment: New Models for Effective User Interface Software Development." IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 23, no. 6. June 1997. pp. 347-365. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. 13.B. A. Myers, D. S. Kosbie. "Reusable Hierarchical Command Objects." Human Factors in Computing Systems, Proceedings SIGCHI'96, Denver, CO, April, 1996, pp 260-267. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. 14.B. A. Myers, R. G. McDanieI, and D. S. Kosbie. "Marquise: Creating Complete User Interfaces by Demonstration" Proceedings of lNTERCHI'93: Human Factors i'n Computing Systems, 1993, pp 293-300. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. 15.J. R. Quinlan. "Induction of Decision Trees?' Machine Learning, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Vol. 1, 1986, pp 81- 106. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. 16.Reader Rabbit. The Learning Company, 1987.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.M. Rettig. "Prototyping for tiny fingers." Communications of the ACM 37, 4 (April 1994). pp. 21-27. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. 18.K. VanLehn. "Learning One Subprocedure per Lesson." Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 31, 1987, pp 1-40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. 19.D. Wolber. "Pavlov: Programming By Stimulus-Response Demonstration." Human Factors in Computing Systems, Proceedings SIGCHI'96, Denver, CO, April, 1996, pp 252-259 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Getting more out of programming-by-demonstration

    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
      CHI '99: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 1999
      632 pages
      ISBN:0201485591
      DOI:10.1145/302979

      Copyright © 1999 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part 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 components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 1 May 1999

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '99 Paper Acceptance Rate78of312submissions,25%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader