Adaptive User Interface Control Prioritization for Legacy Software
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Complex enterprise resource planning software and business software overwhelm users with numerous, often unused controls, making them difficult to navigate, especially on mobile devices where excessive controls render applications unusable.
Innovation Solution
Implementing core path logic that analyzes user interactions to predict and prioritize the next likely controls, presenting them in a tailored, limited graphical user interface, thereby filtering out less frequently used controls and enhancing usability.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Adaptability or versatility
If software is designed to be versatile and support a wide variety of possible uses, then adaptability is improved, but device complexity increases and ease of operation deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the comprehensive control set into context-relevant subsets. The system divides the full range of software controls into multiple specialized views, each tailored to specific user contexts, tasks, or roles. This segmentation allows the interface to present only necessary controls for the current situation while maintaining access to the complete control set when needed, thereby reducing perceived complexity without sacrificing versatility.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements dynamic adaptation of the interface based on user context, behavior patterns, and task requirements. The system continuously monitors user interactions and dynamically reconfigures which controls are presented, how they are organized, and their visual prominence. This dynamic behavior allows the same software to adapt its complexity level to match the user's current needs, maintaining versatility while optimizing ease of operation for each specific context.
2Adaptability or versatility
If software presents all available controls and fields, then adaptability is improved, but ease of operation deteriorates due to user confusion and distraction
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies local quality by customizing the interface presentation for different user contexts, roles, and task states. Instead of providing a uniform view of all controls to all users, the system tailors the control set and their arrangement based on local user characteristics and current operational context. This allows each user to see controls with appropriate visual weight and organization for their specific needs, reducing confusion while maintaining access to the full software capability set.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent incorporates feedback mechanisms that monitor user interactions, success patterns, and confusion indicators. The system uses this feedback to continuously refine which controls are presented and how they are organized. By observing what controls users actually use and when they experience difficulty, the system adapts its presentations to reduce confusion while ensuring all necessary controls remain accessible when needed for versatile operation.
3Device complexity
If all controls are presented with equal visual presentation, then device complexity is reduced, but ease of operation deteriorates because important controls are not distinguished
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies differentiated visual presentation based on local context, control importance, and user relevance. Rather than treating all controls uniformly, the system varies visual properties such as size, color, positioning, and grouping to reflect the relative importance and urgency of different controls in the current context. This selective visual differentiation maintains interface simplicity by only applying distinctive styling to controls that need emphasis, while keeping less important controls with standard presentation.
Data Source
AI summary
Embodiments are disclosed that provide for adaptively anticipating user interactions with a computer application. In one embodiment, an ordered history of user interactions, with controls of a computerized form provided by a legacy computer application, is captured. A likelihood data structure is generated which represents conditional probabilities indicating the likelihood that each control of the computerized form will be a next control used. A list of next likely controls to be used is generated based on the likelihood data structure. The next likely controls are ranked within the list according to conditional probability. A limited graphical user interface, representing the list of next likely controls, is generated. A next control of the computerized form to be used is regulated by displaying the limited graphical user interface.