机械专业毕业设计(论文)外文资料翻译.doc

南 京 理 工 大 学毕业设计(论文)外文资料翻译学院（系）： 机械工程学院 专 业： 设计艺术 姓 名： 学 号： 0101160101 (用外文写)外文出处： http :/www.uclic.ucl.ac.uk /annb/ cassm/index.html 附 件： 1.外文资料翻译译文；2.外文原文。 指导教师评语：翻译基本正确，中文叙述通顺。 签名： 年 月 日注：请将该封面与附件装订成册。附件1：外文资料翻译译文 以概念为基础的面与结构的不协调性分析concept-based analysis of surface and structural misfits (cassm)介绍一：总揽cassm是一种新的针对人机间不协调性的分析，我们认为作为一种新的分析方式它有以下几种可取之处： 它集中于概念分析而不是针对任务或程序。 因此， 它弥补了现在的大多数针对可用性分析的方式的不足。特别是， 它从概念上分析了人机间的不协调性。 它是轻巧且简洁的不会受太多细节的制约。cassm 分析方式甚至不必做到非完成不可或是结果必须有用。 作为一种认知符号， 它在思想模型与设计工作之间架起了一座桥梁。 它与很多绿色认知观念关系密切。 cassm 最初由ann blandford和thomas green发起，并在lain connell的支持下在伦敦人机交流中心大学得到发展， 并得到epsrc 的资金支持，认证字号为 gr/r39108。 (epsrc原先的名字叫osm（本体论创作模型 ontological sketch models）， 但这后来被证明太不醒目。) 我们选择大波斯菊作为我们研究的象征： 小巧、优雅同时生命力旺盛。介绍二：cassm能够带来的帮助。cassm能帮助分析者们用一种富有结构性和严格的方式去思考系统和使用者的各种表现。 举例说明：我们向伦敦救护车的呼叫操作手柄采用了cassm ，我们发现了关于“呼叫”的两种概念： 紧急呼叫(有人拨打999来通报事故)；这种概念归结于呼叫线路的识别、被通报事故的自然属性、报告者的地点，等等。 事故 有诸如伤亡人数、地点、事故类型等的属性。 在公共场所发生的事故,比如道路交通事故或火车撞击事故, 为了某一起事故经常会有一打甚至几百个呼救电话打过来。. 问题是. 那时，救护车人员的计算机系统就迫使他们去搞处理呼救而不是事故本身, 使他们专注于呼救的来源、去处理每一通电话。 这样，他们便不得不成百上千遍地辨别信息。在繁忙的时间段，这会耽误他们处理别的事故.当然，这是明显的后见之明。 但这在当时并不明显：这需要严格的、富有结构性的cassm 系统来区别开这两种概念。对于更多细节问题，cassm 支持考虑诸如黏度等问题的结构不协调性. 但这个话题对于总揽来说需要太多的细节，所以我们把它放到指南里面。介绍三：不协调性的概念。一个具有高度可用性的成功的信息设备在各方面都必须是成功的。首先它必须做到的就是，它必须使被制作进设备的概念与计划使用者的概念相匹配。 如果使用者在考虑关于歌的问题，那么设备也需要考虑一个整体的歌，而不是分开的字符。在人机界面上的概念设计必须是有效且有用的；如果使用者改变了某些东西，这不应该会使设备另外某些不可见但却相关联的部分发生改变。 (想象一下，当你改变了数据表内的某个单元，几乎所有另外的部分都发生了变化，这将是怎样一种情形？)所有真正的设备终结完美要求和真实的受限制的世界之间的一种平衡，所以了解我们能达到怎样的平衡就很重要了。 cassm 研究的就是设计所能够达到的满足使用者要求的程度到底是如何。 从这层关系上看cassm与从前对概念性不协调关注甚少的使用者评价分析法有非常大的区别。介绍四：cassm模型cassm 描述了两种概念,每个用相同语言来表达：使用者持有的概念， 被制作进设备的概念。 考虑一个移动电话（手机）的电话簿。使用者的概念就是一个人的名字和一个电话号码。设备的观念只是一个地址簿的条目， 而这相对与人来说就会变成两条：名字和电话号码，这些都可以在界面的视觉效果上达到需要的目的。但是设备只有有限的空间，所以条目会有一个最大数， 设备总会有相对应的最大值，表现在 cassm 里就是一个设备约束关系。这不会出现在使用者的最初观念里，这个问题不会有太大的麻烦，但如果这样强制的限制出现太多，学习和记忆就会出现困难。使用者同样会有一群人的概念，比如一个团队的各个成员。手机不会明白什么叫一个团队，于是不协调性出现了， 它会制造麻烦。 为了向队中每一个成员发送信息，一条信息便不得不独个发送多次这便是cassm发现的一个粘性循环。为了所有这些表现出来，模型的制作者必须对使用者的观念有足够充分的了解，同时，对设备的性能也要了解。 然后所有这些概念与特征需要得到分析并表现成为一个正式的cassm 模型。我们用表格来表现使之更容易被理解：名字. 使用者？.交流界面?.系统?能否创造?能否改变?条目是 是是是是条目名称是是是是是团队是否否否否为了帮助组织和分析这样的表格我们制作了一个编辑和分析工具： cassata。 cassata翻译模型的屏幕抓取。介绍五：cassm在设计中的应用cassm 是，首先且最重要的，一个评估的技术。那么它如何体现在设计的过程中呢？ 我们现在没有一个过程的模型，但以下是我们的观点：设计的进化:在设计中，你经常做的就是试图使设计更贴合使用者想象的他们需要产品为他们做的事。使用者的想法是以以下几点作为出发点的： 他们工作所使用的“真实世界的东西”。 那些东西被向他们描述的方式。 他们从前在这些系统中所得到的经验。 你经常想做的就是开拓思维，cassm 能帮助你接合使用者的观点，助你联系现在的设计系统并考虑如何设计与未来时代的产品相适应的方式。设计的进化演变有时，设计就是尝试新的人机交流界面的方式。那么现存的你可以调用的使用者概念是什么，什么又是新的呢？ 对于那些新的玩意，你又如何用来制作产品使使用者更快更好地意识到他们的好处？让 cassm 来帮你吧。 关于使用者的来历； 他们对于现在这个领域的想法并由此； . 对于一个新的设计，哪些方面需要特别注意？ 可以使用哪些最初的想法？ 可以从现存的系统中得到哪些有用的方面（如果有的话）。 在摘要中, cassm 支持考虑使用者的现在和将来的心理，一个有用的设计在满足那些需要新事物的人们时候需要解决一个关于安于现状和努力发掘新事物之间的一个平衡. 但需要避开不许要的发展和概念的混乱。附件2：外文原文（复印件）concept-based analysis of surface and structural misfits (cassm)introduction p1: overview cassm is a novel approach to usability analysis that focuses attention on misfits between user and system concepts. we believe that as an approach it has several desirable qualities: it focuses on concepts rather than tasks or procedures. consequently, it complements the majority of existing approaches to usability evaluation. in particular, it analyses conceptual misfits between user and system. it is lightweight and succinct - no death by detail. cassm analyses do not even have to be complete or consistent to be useful. as a notation, it provides a bridge between mental models and design issues. it bears a close relationship to many of greens cognitive dimensions. cassm was originated by ann blandford and thomas green, and developed in a project at the university of london interaction centre (uclic) with the assistance of iain connell, funded by the epsrc under grant no. gr/r39108. (the original name was osm, for ontological sketch models, but that proved too obscure.) we chose the plant cosmea for our symbol: small, elegant, and easy to grow. introduction p 2: what cassm offerscassm helps the analyst to think about system and user representations in a structured and rigorous way. examplewe applied cassm to london ambulance services call-handling. we found two different concepts of call: emergency call (someone dialling 999 to report an incident); this concept has attributes such as caller line identifier, nature of incident as reported, caller location, etc. incident with properties such as number of casualties, location, type of incident, etc. incidents in public places, such as road traffic accidents or train crashes, can generate dozens or even hundreds of emergency calls for a single incident. problem . at that time the ambulance controllers had a computer system that forced them to process emergency calls rather than incidents, requiring them to specify which resources (ambulances etc.) had been deployed to each phone call. so they had to repeat identical information dozens or hundreds of times. at a busy time, this might delay their response to some other incident .obvious with hindsight, of course. but it wasnt obvious at the time: it was the structured, rigorous cassm analysis that helped tease these two concepts apart. in more detailed working, cassm can support thinking about structural misfits such as viscosity . but that topic demands too much detail for an overview, and is left to the tutorial.introduction p3: the misfit concept a highly-usable, highly successful it-based device must succeed in many ways. one way it must succeed is by matching the concepts built into the device with the concepts held by the intended users. if users think about songs, the device should deal in songs, not in individual notes.the concepts must be available and usable at the interface between the user and the system; and if the user changes something, it should not result in unexpected changes to other parts of the device that are not visibly related. (consider what happens when you change a cell in a spreadsheet - almost anything could happen anywhere else in the sheet.)every real device is a balance between the competing demands of perfection and real-world constraints - so it is important to know how far off-balance we might be. cassm investigates the degree to which a design fits the concepts of intended users. in that respect it is rather different from previous user evaluation methods which have paid little attention to conceptual mismatch. introduction p4: cassm models cassm describes two sorts of concepts, using the same language for each: concepts held by the user, and concepts built into the device. think about a mobile phone (cell phone) address list. the user has the concept of a person with a name and a phone number. the device has the concept of an address book entry, which corresponds to a person, and has two attributes, name and number. all of these are readily available at the interface.but the device has a finite size, so there is a maximum number of entries. that is a fixed device limitation, represented in cassm as a device-constraint relationship, which is not part of the users original conceptual model. no great problem in this case, but if there are too many arbitrary device limitations, it will be hard to learn. the user might also have the concept of a group of people, such as members of a band. the phone doesnt know about groups, so here is a misfit. misfits make problems. to send a message to all band members, a message has to be sent to each member individually - an instance of repetition viscosity that will be detected by cassm.to figure this out, the modeller has to have sufficient understanding of the users concepts, and has to understand the device well enough. then the concepts and features need to be analysed and laid out more formally as a cassm model. we have found it useful to represent them in a tabular form:name . user?. interface ?. system?creatable?changeable?yesyesyesyesyesbandyesnonononoto help organise and analyse such tables we have created an editor and analysis tool, cassata (follow link to support tools).screenshot from cassata version of the model introduction p 5: cassm in design cassm is, first and foremost, an evaluative technique. so how does it fit within a design process? we do not have a process model (whew!), but our view is as follows:design evolution:in design, you are often trying to make products fit better with the ways users are thinking about what theyre doing. users thinking will be based on many factors such as the real-world things theyre working with the ways things have been described to them the ways they have experienced systems in the past. you often want to exploit this thinking. cassm helps you articulate the users view and relate that to current systems in ways that should help