![](bg4.png)
a selection, thus completing the process of
specifying the date correctly.
The above example was deliberately kept simple
for the sake of brevity, but it demonstrates the same
reasoning mechanism we will use to support errors
caused by mismatches between data within different
process interfaces. Because the system has
knowledge about the context for and linkages
between each data element, it will do more than just
display an error message; it will identify the task
interface that will offer the user a choice of only
appropriate values or present choices for possible
courses of action to address the error. Even if the
user does not have the authority to perform a
particular corrective action, she will at least learn
about the necessary steps and could ask the
appropriate person to perform them.
The benefits of using the planning framework in
error recovery are the flexibility and extensibility it
affords. Once the planner is embedded within the
system, additional functions and/or error diagnostics
can be specified in a declarative fashion through
textual descriptions such as those presented here.
The planning engine will be able to recognize new
error conditions and create new solution methods
that utilize the newly added functions as appropriate.
No modifications to the application code will be
needed, as opposed to approaches based on
“hardcoding” all responses to error situations, which
require modifying significant parts of the error-
handling code throughout the application.
4 CONCLUSIONS
We have described a novel approach for error
handling based on the application of reasoning
capability within a planning framework. This
approach enables the system to act as a collaborative
partner to its users in helping them navigate their
way through error situations. In response to an error,
the system will diagnose the cause and dynamically
construct and execute a plan for informing the user
about the underlying causes of an error and,
whenever possible, for guiding her through
corrective actions.
The next stage in this research is to implement
this approach in an ERP prototype interface for
handling a range of realistic error situations. This
prototype will then be used for evaluating the
effectiveness of our design interventions.
REFERENCES
Babaian, T., Grosz, B. J., & Shieber, S. M., 2002. A
writer’s collaborative assistant. In Proceedings of
IUI’2002, 7-14. ACM Press.
Davies, J. R., Gertner, A. S., Lesh, N., Rich, C., Sidner, C.
L., & Rickel, J., 2001. Incorporating tutorial strategies
into an intelligent assistant. In Proceedings of
IUI’’2001, 53-56, ACM Press.
Eisenstein, J. & Rich, C. 2002. Agents and GUIs from task
models. In Proceedings of IUI’2002, 47--54, ACM
Press.
Grosz, B. J., 1996. AAAI-94 presidential address:
Collaborative systems. AI Magazine, 17(2), 67-85.
Grosz, B. J., 2005. Beyond Mice and Menus. In
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society,
149(4), 529-523.
ISO 9241-11, 1998. Ergonomics requirements for office
work with visual display terminals, part 11 - guidance
on usability. International Standards Organization.
Johnson, W. L., Shaw, E., Marshall, A., & LaBore, C.,
2003. Evolution of user interaction: the case of agent
Adele. In Proceedings of the 8th international
Conference on intelligent User interfaces, 93-100.
ACM Press.
Rich, C., Sidner, C. L., & Lesh, N., 2001. Collagen:
applying collaborative discourse theory to human-
computer interaction. AI Magazine. 22, 4 (Oct. 2001),
15-25.
Russell, S. & Norvig, P., 2002. Artificial Intelligence: a
Modern Approach. Prentice Hall.
Shieber, S. M., 1996. A call for collaborative interfaces.
ACM Computing Surveys, 28A(electronic), 143.
Terveen, L.G., 1995. An overview of human-computer
collaboration. Knowledge-Based Systems Journal,
Special Issue on Human-Computer Collaboration,
8(2-3), 67-81.
Topi, H., Babaian, T., & Lucas, W., 2005. Identifying
usability issues with an ERP implementation. In
Proceedings of ICEIS’2005, pages 128–133.
Topi, H.; Lucas, W.; and Babaian, T., 2006. Using
informal notes for sharing corporate technology know-
how. European Journal of Information Systems,
15(5):486–499.
Traum, D., Rickel, J., Gratch, J., & Marsella, S., 2003.
Negotiation over tasks in hybrid human-agent teams
for simulation-based training. In Proceedings of the
Second international Joint Conference on Autonomous
Agents and Multiagent Systems, 441-448, ACM, New
York.
A REASONED APPROACH TO ERROR HANDLING - Position Paper on Work-in-Progress
423