Evaluating Interface Consistency and User Control in Fog and Edge Computing Dashboards: A Heuristic Analysis of Open-Source Platforms
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Fog and edge computing platforms increasingly become necessary for the management of distributed Internet of Things services, but their management dashboards are not typically very friendly to users. This study discusses a heuristic analysis of two most widely used open-source management dashboards, EdgeX Foundry and FogFlow, in terms of five usability guidelines: consistency and standards, user control and freedom, visibility of system status, error prevention, and help and documentation. Nineteen usability issues were identified and rated according to Nielsen's heuristic model through task-based, expert-led walkthroughs. Major issues included non-consistent terminology, a lack of undo or confirm features for critical actions, inadequate real-time feedback, and a lack of embedded help facilities. These issues reduce operation effectiveness and increase the likelihood of user error, most notably in time-sensitive or high-risk scenarios. The study proposes certain recommendations such as standardizing the components of the interface, improving the options provided to the users for control, improving system feedback, and incorporating contextual help. The incorporation of human-centered design principles during the creation of fog and edge dashboards will significantly enhance usability, enable better decision-making, and enable easier use in real-world implementations.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
I/we certify that I/we have participated sufficiently in the intellectual content, conception and design of this work or the analysis and interpretation of the data (when applicable), as well as the writing of the manuscript, to take public responsibility for it and have agreed to have my/our name listed as a contributor. I/we believe the manuscript represents valid work. Neither this manuscript nor one with substantially similar content under my/our authorship has been published or is being considered for publication elsewhere, except as described in the covering letter. I/we certify that all the data collected during the study is presented in this manuscript and no data from the study has been or will be published separately. I/we attest that, if requested by the editors, I/we will provide the data/information or will cooperate fully in obtaining and providing the data/information on which the manuscript is based, for examination by the editors or their assignees. Financial interests, direct or indirect, that exist or may be perceived to exist for individual contributors in connection with the content of this paper have been disclosed in the cover letter. Sources of outside support of the project are named in the cover letter.
I/We hereby transfer(s), assign(s), or otherwise convey(s) all copyright ownership, including any and all rights incidental thereto, exclusively to the Journal, in the event that such work is published by the Journal. The Journal shall own the work, including 1) copyright; 2) the right to grant permission to republish the article in whole or in part, with or without fee; 3) the right to produce preprints or reprints and translate into languages other than English for sale or free distribution; and 4) the right to republish the work in a collection of articles in any other mechanical or electronic format.
We give the rights to the corresponding author to make necessary changes as per the request of the journal, do the rest of the correspondence on our behalf and he/she will act as the guarantor for the manuscript on our behalf.
All persons who have made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript, but who are not contributors, are named in the Acknowledgment and have given me/us their written permission to be named. If I/we do not include an Acknowledgment that means I/we have not received substantial contributions from non-contributors and no contributor has been omitted.
References
F. Bonomi, R. Milito, J. Zhu, and S. Addepalli, “Fog computing and its role in the internet of things,” in Proc. First Edition MCC Workshop on Mobile Cloud Computing, Helsinki, Finland, 2012, pp. 13–16.
J. Carroll, Human-computer interaction: Psychology as a science of design, Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 61–83, 1997.
M. R. Endsley, “Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems,” Human Factors, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 32–64, 1995.
T. Bach, L. Weber, and M. Li, “Patterns and principles of dashboard design: A survey of 144 systems,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 2835–2848, July 2022.
J. Nielsen, Usability Engineering. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann, 1994.
J. Nielsen and R. Molich, “Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces,” in Proc. ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Seattle, WA, 1990, pp. 249–256.
D. A. Norman, The psychology of everyday things. New York, NY: Basic Books, 1988.
D. A. Norman, The design of everyday things (Revised and expanded ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books, 2013.
OpenFog Consortium, “FogFlow User Guide,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.openfog.org/fogflow. [Accessed: January 18, 2025].
EdgeX Foundry, “EdgeX Foundry Documentation,” EdgeX Foundry, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.edgexfoundry.org/docs. [Accessed: January 18, 2025].
J. Pham, T. Nguyen, and M. Tran, “Usability issues in SCADA interfaces: Heuristic and salience model evaluation,” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, vol. 164, May 2023, Art. no. 102876.
B. Shneiderman et al., Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley, 2010.
S. Setlur, A. Karapanos, and A. Kapoor, “Design heuristics for interactive dashboards: A cooperative analytics perspective,” ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 1–37, April 2023.
J. Cram, R. H. Wilson, and P. G. Thompson, “User control and visual clarity in clinical dashboards: A heuristic assessment,” Journal of Healthcare Informatics Research, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 261–274, 2019.
M. Vilarinho, C. Silva, and A. Oliveira, “Heuristic evaluation of patient-reported outcome dashboards: Insights for healthcare UX design,” Journal of Medical Systems, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 1–15, April 2022.
