Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Melwyn Pak Yong Ho

dblp:144/5379 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2016
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 2

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
2 papers
Ubiquitous computing and smart environments · 47% User interface design and tools · 47% Usability and user experience research · 6%
Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper
Empirical software engineering · 100%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Ubiquitous computing and smart environments
smart home
0.422016
Trigger-Action Programming in the Wild: An Analysis of 200, 000 IFTTT Recipes · CHI 2016
Practical trigger-action programming in the smart home · CHI 2014
User interface design and tools
end-user programming
0.212016
Trigger-Action Programming in the Wild: An Analysis of 200, 000 IFTTT Recipes · CHI 2016
User interface design and tools › end-user development
trigger-action programming
0.212014
Practical trigger-action programming in the smart home · CHI 2014
Empirical software engineering
mining software repositories
0.112016
Trigger-Action Programming in the Wild: An Analysis of 200, 000 IFTTT Recipes · CHI 2016
Usability and user experience research › usability evaluation
usability testing
0.112014
Practical trigger-action programming in the smart home · CHI 2014

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

dataset analysis · 0.7scraping · 0.5usability test · 0.2online study · 0.2
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2016 Trigger-Action Programming in the Wild: An Analysis of 200, 000 IFTTT Recipes
abstract
While researchers have long investigated end-user programming using a trigger-action (if-then) model, the website IFTTT is among the first instances of this paradigm being used on a large scale. To understand what IFTTT users are creating, we scraped the 224,590 programs shared publicly on IFTTT as of September 2015 and are releasing this dataset to spur future research. We characterize aspects of these programs and the IFTTT ecosystem over time. We find a large number of users are crafting a diverse set of end-user programs---over 100,000 different users have shared programs. These programs represent a very broad array of connections that appear to fill gaps in functionality, yet users often duplicate others' programs.
Blase Ur, Melwyn Pak Yong Ho, Stephen Brawner, Jiyun Lee, Sarah Mennicken, Noah Picard, Diane Schulze, Michael L. Littman
CHI2
2014 Practical trigger-action programming in the smart home
abstract
We investigate the practicality of letting average users customize smart-home devices using trigger-action ("if, then") programming. We find trigger-action programming can express most desired behaviors submitted by participants in an online study. We identify a class of triggers requiring machine learning that has received little attention. We evaluate the uniqueness of the 67,169 trigger-action programs shared on IFTTT.com, finding that real users have written a large number of unique trigger-action interactions. Finally, we conduct a 226-participant usability test of trigger-action programming, finding that inexperienced users can quickly learn to create programs containing multiple triggers or actions.
Blase Ur, Elyse McManus, Melwyn Pak Yong Ho, Michael L. Littman
CHI3