This paper proposes a conceptual framework for the design and continuous evolution of ambient intelligence environments. The framework is based on the metaphor of interconnection between humans and devices belonging to the intelligent environment. All actors are called on to perceive and act on the environment itself, giving rise to novel and unanticipated behaviors. To this aim, the proposed framework is structured along three layers - physical, inference and user - sharing an information space of events, conditions and actions. In particular, a EUD approach is advocated for the user layer to support ambient configuration and management and foster a smooth and progressive co-evolution of users and technologies.
The Ambient Intelligence (AmI) field is aimed at realizing scenarios where people will
move and live in “intelligent” electronic environments, that is, in active places that have
claims of being sensitive and responsive to their needs [
This view brings into conceiving an AmI environment as a socio-technical system, which encompasses not only a variety of hardware and software components, such as sensors, robots, actuators, apps and Web applications, but also people that are bound together by social ties and personal relations of acquaintance and that are linked each
other through their personal devices and the hardware/software components distributed
in the environment. This results in a socio-technical network of humans and
non-humans, where both kinds of actors are able to perceive and act in the environment. An
important feature of such a network is the ability to cope with the continuous changes
in the environment and the network itself, by reconfiguring human-human,
machinemachine and human-machine relationships [
EUD in ambient intelligence has not received, till now, the necessary attention. The
survey reported in [
In this paper we delineate a conceptual framework for the development, maintenance
and evolution of a diffusely intelligent and cooperative socio-technical environment.
The idea underlying this framework is that of interconnection [
Copyright © 2014 for the individual papers by the papers' authors. Copying permitted for private and academic purposes. This volume is published and copyrighted by its editors.
We propose a framework based on the central concept of interconnection among all
actors involved in the intelligent environment, i.e., devices and humans, and of fluid
exchange of states, conditions and behaviors. This should be guaranteed so that the
intelligent environment could really align dynamically and adaptively to the user needs
of information and support for action. The main point of this metaphor is that an AmI
environment is not simply an aggregation of computational devices endowed with
either perceptual or effectual capabilities, or both of these, bound together by functional
relations; but rather what emerges as something new from this aggregation. In other
words, it is an environment where some states and conditions are visible and available
(e.g., the temperature of the room, what time it is, if the door is open, etc.) and some
actions are feasible (e.g., raise the room temperature, mute the mobile, call the security,
etc.). And, last but not the least, where “intelligent inference” is kept in the loop
between conditions and actions, so that some value for the ambient inhabitants is created
through a collective intelligence [
The above considerations bring to conceive an AmI environment as emerging from the good fit of three layers into a single coherent conceptual architecture (see Figure 1): 1) the physical layer, where devices operate, with their perceptual and effectual capabilities, and inter-operate, through a shared information space that collects their states and acts as both a blackboard and a communication medium; 2) the inference layer, where logical reasoning is automatically performed to link perceptions to actions; 3) the user layer, where people are called on to express their preferences through actions, also in response to state changes and/or ambient conditions, as well as to modify and manipulate the “logic” (i.e., rules, policies, complex behaviors) their ambient should follow to either assist or satisfy them (EUD activities).
The last 10 years or so of AmI research has brought to devices that are sufficiently
reliable and capable to interoperate with other devices and the overall hosting
infrastructure [
Copyright © 2014 for the individual papers by the papers' authors. Copying permitted for private and academic purposes. This volume is published and copyrighted by its editors.
lightening policy should be somehow as easy as switching a light on manually (or easier!). In order words, end users should consider participation in rule creation as a meaningful activity and not as an additional duty that they must satisfy. On the other side, the sustainability challenge is closely related and regards the fact that users should find convenient to interact with their intelligent “ambients” even after that the thrill for the technology novelty and curiosity have faded out and/or after that some expert has gone away and left the lay user alone with her/his own computational support. This is an aspect that is seldom considered in the AmI literature and it means to carefully design the user layer and its EUD features, so that an AmI environment can smoothly co-evolve with the users’ needs and technologies available (see Figure 1), without forcing users to perform difficult and undesired tasks. The implementation of the proposed conceptual framework will include an exploration of different solutions for the user layer, to identify the best interaction mechanisms that may sustain participation and collaboration to rule creation. In particular, we have already started such exploration by considering a variety of user-oriented tools in the AmI and Internet of Things domains. The idea is to take inspiration for the design of an interaction metaphor that is compatible with the interconnection metaphor of our conceptual framework and able to address some challenges that the framework brings about: rule definition and modification by different users, management of conflicting rules, openness to environment and/or community extensions over time, simplicity and expressiveness of single rules, overall readability of the configuration of the AmI environment. In particular, the filtered lists metaphor of IFTTT and Atooma appear as the most suitable for collaborative and distributed development of ECA rules, to be managed by the underlying distributed inference engine foreseen in our framework. Therefore, we will start with a comparison between these two systems. Another complementary line of research would pursue the perceived relative advantage of people already using an AmI system since a while, to fill the gap in the literature between technical feasibility and human-centred sustainability over time. Proc. of Third International Workshop on Cultures of Participation in the Digital Age - CoPDA 2015 Madrid (Spain), May 26th, 2015 (published at http://ceur-ws.org).
Copyright © 2014 for the individual papers by the papers' authors. Copying permitted for private and academic purposes. This volume is published and copyrighted by its editors.