Table I. Top table: overall workflow...

Table I.

Top table: overall workflow evaluation, separately for the original (“orig.”) and adaptive (“adapt.”) design tasks including average ratings (“Av.”). Bottom table: General evaluation of acceptance and important aspects for design automation and optimization applications. Scale: –2 (absolutely no), –1 (rather no), 0 (neutral), +1 (rather yes), +2 (absolutely yes)

Question	Design	Evaluation						Av.
Overall evaluation
Does it make sense?	Orig.	1	0		1			0.67
	Adapt.	1	1		2			1.33
Do you think it works?	Orig.	1	1		1			1.00
	Adapt.	1	2		1			1.33
Would you use it?	Orig.	1	0		1			0.67
	Adapt.	1	2		1			1.33
Optimization
Would you use it?	Orig.	–1	–1		0			–0.67
	Adapt.	1	0		1			0.67
Would you rather draw the path	Orig.	2	2		1			1.67
manually?	Adapt.	2	1		1			1.33
Would you trust it?	Orig.	1	1		1			1.00
	Adapt.	1	1		1			1.00
Would you use the proposed solutions?	Orig.	1	–1		1			0.33
	Adapt.	1	2		1			1.33
Does run-time need to be instant?	Orig.	2	1		1			1.33
	Adapt.	2	–1		0			0.33
Interaction
In general?	Orig.	2	1		2			1.67
	Adapt.	2	2		2			2.00
For moving access points and obstacles?	Orig.	1	1		1			1.00
	Adapt.	1	2		2			1.67
Pulling lines?	Orig.	2	2		2			2.00
	Adapt.	2	2		2			2.00
With the optimizer?	Orig.	0	1		1			0.67
	Adapt.	1	2		1			1.33
Selecting from several solutions?	Orig.	2	1		1			1.33
	Adapt.	2	2		2			2.00
Seamlessness
Is the integration of optimization and	Orig.	1	1		1			1.00
ACC-Design important?	Adapt.	1	2		2			1.67
Does this workflow increase the value of	Orig.	2	1		1			1.33
ACC-Design?	Adapt.	2	1		1			1.33
Question		Evaluation						Av.
Acceptance
Practical relevance		2	2	2	2	1	2	1.83
Stepwise introduction		1	0	–1	0	0	0	0.00
Stepwise integration of users		1	2	1	1	1	1	1.17
See/test prototype		1	0	–1	0	1	0	0.17
Trust/understand solution		1	1	2	2	2	1	1.50
Influence solution finding		2	2	2	2	1	2	1.83
Aspects
Functionality		2	1	1	1	1	2	1.33
Usability		2	1	1	1	2	2	1.50
Comprehensibility/traceability		0	0	2	1	1	1	0.83
Seamlessness		2	0	0	0	1	1	0.67

Question	Design	Evaluation						Av.
Overall evaluation
Does it make sense?	Orig.	1	0		1			0.67
	Adapt.	1	1		2			1.33
Do you think it works?	Orig.	1	1		1			1.00
	Adapt.	1	2		1			1.33
Would you use it?	Orig.	1	0		1			0.67
	Adapt.	1	2		1			1.33
Optimization
Would you use it?	Orig.	–1	–1		0			–0.67
	Adapt.	1	0		1			0.67
Would you rather draw the path	Orig.	2	2		1			1.67
manually?	Adapt.	2	1		1			1.33
Would you trust it?	Orig.	1	1		1			1.00
	Adapt.	1	1		1			1.00
Would you use the proposed solutions?	Orig.	1	–1		1			0.33
	Adapt.	1	2		1			1.33
Does run-time need to be instant?	Orig.	2	1		1			1.33
	Adapt.	2	–1		0			0.33
Interaction
In general?	Orig.	2	1		2			1.67
	Adapt.	2	2		2			2.00
For moving access points and obstacles?	Orig.	1	1		1			1.00
	Adapt.	1	2		2			1.67
Pulling lines?	Orig.	2	2		2			2.00
	Adapt.	2	2		2			2.00
With the optimizer?	Orig.	0	1		1			0.67
	Adapt.	1	2		1			1.33
Selecting from several solutions?	Orig.	2	1		1			1.33
	Adapt.	2	2		2			2.00
Seamlessness
Is the integration of optimization and	Orig.	1	1		1			1.00
ACC-Design important?	Adapt.	1	2		2			1.67
Does this workflow increase the value of	Orig.	2	1		1			1.33
ACC-Design?	Adapt.	2	1		1			1.33
Question		Evaluation						Av.
Acceptance
Practical relevance		2	2	2	2	1	2	1.83
Stepwise introduction		1	0	–1	0	0	0	0.00
Stepwise integration of users		1	2	1	1	1	1	1.17
See/test prototype		1	0	–1	0	1	0	0.17
Trust/understand solution		1	1	2	2	2	1	1.50
Influence solution finding		2	2	2	2	1	2	1.83
Aspects
Functionality		2	1	1	1	1	2	1.33
Usability		2	1	1	1	2	2	1.50
Comprehensibility/traceability		0	0	2	1	1	1	0.83
Seamlessness		2	0	0	0	1	1	0.67

[ViewLarge]