Cooperative Multi-Objective Bayesian Design Optimization

IF 4.3 3区 材料科学 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC ACS Applied Electronic Materials Pub Date : 2024-04-17 DOI:10.1145/3657643
George Mo, John Dudley, Liwei Chan, Yi-Chi Liao, Antti Oulasvirta, Per Ola Kristensson
{"title":"Cooperative Multi-Objective Bayesian Design Optimization","authors":"George Mo, John Dudley, Liwei Chan, Yi-Chi Liao, Antti Oulasvirta, Per Ola Kristensson","doi":"10.1145/3657643","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Computational methods can potentially facilitate user interface design by complementing designer intuition, prior experience, and personal preference. Framing a user interface design task as a multi-objective optimization problem can help with operationalizing and structuring this process at the expense of designer agency and experience. While offering a systematic means of exploring the design space, the optimization process cannot typically leverage the designer’s expertise in quickly identifying that a given ‘bad’ design is not worth evaluating. We here examine a cooperative approach where both the designer and optimization process share a common goal, and work in partnership by establishing a shared understanding of the design space. We tackle the research question: how can we foster cooperation between the designer and a systematic optimization process in order to best leverage their combined strength? We introduce and present an evaluation of a cooperative approach that allows the user to express their design insight and work in concert with a multi-objective design process. We find that the cooperative approach successfully encourages designers to explore more widely in the design space than when they are working without assistance from an optimization process. The cooperative approach also delivers design outcomes that are comparable to an optimization process run without any direct designer input, but achieves this with greater efficiency and substantially higher designer engagement levels.</p>","PeriodicalId":3,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Electronic Materials","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3657643","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Computational methods can potentially facilitate user interface design by complementing designer intuition, prior experience, and personal preference. Framing a user interface design task as a multi-objective optimization problem can help with operationalizing and structuring this process at the expense of designer agency and experience. While offering a systematic means of exploring the design space, the optimization process cannot typically leverage the designer’s expertise in quickly identifying that a given ‘bad’ design is not worth evaluating. We here examine a cooperative approach where both the designer and optimization process share a common goal, and work in partnership by establishing a shared understanding of the design space. We tackle the research question: how can we foster cooperation between the designer and a systematic optimization process in order to best leverage their combined strength? We introduce and present an evaluation of a cooperative approach that allows the user to express their design insight and work in concert with a multi-objective design process. We find that the cooperative approach successfully encourages designers to explore more widely in the design space than when they are working without assistance from an optimization process. The cooperative approach also delivers design outcomes that are comparable to an optimization process run without any direct designer input, but achieves this with greater efficiency and substantially higher designer engagement levels.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
合作式多目标贝叶斯设计优化
计算方法可以补充设计者的直觉、先前经验和个人偏好,从而为用户界面设计提供潜在的便利。将用户界面设计任务构建为一个多目标优化问题,有助于在牺牲设计者的主观能动性和经验的前提下,实现这一过程的可操作性和结构化。虽然优化过程提供了一种探索设计空间的系统化方法,但它通常无法利用设计者的专业知识来快速识别某个 "糟糕 "的设计是否值得评估。在这里,我们研究了一种合作方法,在这种方法中,设计者和优化流程拥有共同的目标,并通过建立对设计空间的共同理解来开展合作。我们要解决的研究问题是:如何促进设计者与系统优化流程之间的合作,从而最大限度地发挥它们的综合优势?我们介绍并评估了一种合作方法,这种方法允许用户表达自己的设计见解,并与多目标设计流程协同工作。我们发现,与没有优化流程协助的情况相比,合作方法成功地鼓励了设计人员在设计空间中进行更广泛的探索。合作方法所产生的设计结果与没有设计人员直接输入的优化流程不相上下,但效率更高,设计人员的参与度也更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
4.30%
发文量
567
期刊最新文献
Hyperbaric oxygen treatment promotes tendon-bone interface healing in a rabbit model of rotator cuff tears. Oxygen-ozone therapy for myocardial ischemic stroke and cardiovascular disorders. Comparative study on the anti-inflammatory and protective effects of different oxygen therapy regimens on lipopolysaccharide-induced acute lung injury in mice. Heme oxygenase/carbon monoxide system and development of the heart. Hyperbaric oxygen for moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury: outcomes 5-8 years after injury.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1