<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Adaptation and content personalization in the context of multi user museum exhibits</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Nikolaos Partarakis</string-name>
          <email>partarak@ics.forth.gr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Emmanouil Zidianakis</string-name>
          <email>zidian@ics.forth.gr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Margherita Antona</string-name>
          <email>antona@ics.forth.gr</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff2">2</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Constantine Stephanidis</string-name>
          <email>cs@ics.forth.gr University of Crete, Department of Computer Science</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff3">3</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas, (FORTH), Institute of Computer Science (ICS)</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>N. Plastira 100, Heraklion - Crete, GR 70013</addr-line>
          <country country="GR">Greece</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas, (FORTH), Institute of Computer Science (ICS)</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>N. Plastira 100, Heraklion - Crete, GR 70013</addr-line>
          <country country="GR">Greece</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2">
          <label>2</label>
          <institution>Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas, (FORTH), Institute of Computer Science (ICS)</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>N. Plastira 100, Heraklion - Crete, GR 70013</addr-line>
          <country country="GR">Greece</country>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3">
          <label>3</label>
          <institution>Foundation for Research and Technology - Hellas, (FORTH), Institute of Computer Science (ICS)</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>N. Plastira 100, Heraklion - Crete, GR 70013</addr-line>
          <country country="GR">Greece</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>Two dimensional paintings are exhibited in museums and art galleries in the same manner since at least three centuries. However, the emergence of novel interaction techniques and metaphors provides the opportunity to change this status quo, by supporting mixing physical and digital Cultural Heritage experiences. This paper presents the design and implementation of a technological framework based on Ambient Intelligence to enhance visitor experiences within Cultural Heritage Institutions (CHIs) by augmenting two dimensional paintings. Among the major contributions of this research work is the support of personalized multi user access to exhibits, facilitating also adaptation mechanisms for altering the interaction style and content to the requirements of each CHI visitor. A standards compliant knowledge representation and the appropriate authoring tools guarantee the effective integration of this approach in the CHI context.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>J</kwd>
        <kwd>5 (Fine arts)</kwd>
        <kwd>H</kwd>
        <kwd>5</kwd>
        <kwd>1 (Artificial</kwd>
        <kwd>augmented</kwd>
        <kwd>and virtual realities)</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1. Introduction</title>
      <p>
        Ambient Intelligence (AmI) presents a vision of a technological
environment capable of reacting in an attentive, adaptive and
active (sometimes proactive) way to the presence and activities of
humans and objects in order to provide appropriate services to its
inhabitants [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ]. In the context of AmI, the need to adapt a
Copyright © 2016 for this paper by its authors. Copying permitted for
private and academic purposes.
      </p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2. Background</title>
      <p>
        Nowadays CHIs strive to design and implement interactive
exhibitions that offer enjoyable and educational experiences.
However, designing such an exhibition is not an easy task,
because most visitors might visit only once, and a typical visit
only lasts for a very short time [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ], [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ]. To address such issues
interactive exhibits are often employed as a means of providing
alternative experiences. Such exhibits can be broadly classified in
four categories: (a) hybrid exhibits which aim at augmenting an
artifact with graphics [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ] or audio commentaries [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ]; (b) side
exhibits which are placed adjacent to a real exhibit, providing
indirect exploration of, and interaction with it [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref8">8</xref>
        ]; (c) isolated, but
linked, exhibits having “a conceptual affinity with the original
artwork”; they are related to a real exhibit but installed in
separate, dedicated, locations [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref7">7</xref>
        ], [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ]; and (d) stand-alone
exhibits containing content related to an exhibition, but not
directly linked to an artifact [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        One of the main challenges of interactive exhibits is the need to
cope with the requirements of diverse users. These requirements
may affect both desired interaction and content. A possible
solution to address these requirements could be the integration of
some form of intelligence in the way that UIs are built and
information is presented. Intelligent user interfaces are
characterized by their capability to adapt at run-time and make
several communication decisions concerning ‘what’, ‘when’,
‘why’ and ‘how’ to communicate, through a certain adaptation
strategy [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref16">16</xref>
        ]. The provision of these qualities within CHIs entails
the need to address design issues far more complex than those
faced by traditional HCI. To address similar needs, a user
interface adaptation methodology has been proposed as a
complete technological solution for supporting universal access of
interactive applications and services [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref17">17</xref>
        ]. This methodology
conveyed a new perspective into the development of user
interfaces, providing a principled and systematic approach
towards coping with diversity in the target user requirements,
tasks and environments of use [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref18">18</xref>
        ]. Several UI adaptation
frameworks have been proposed implementing the
aforementioned development methodology, such as for example
the EAGER framework [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref20">19</xref>
        ] that allows Web developers to build
adaptive applications. In these prior approaches knowledge about
users was either statically represented or acquired through formal
specifications using special purpose programming languages [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref21">20</xref>
        ].
These ad-hoc approaches are currently replaced through the usage
of knowledge modelled with the help of a web ontology language
such as OWL [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref22">21</xref>
        ]. Such models store the appropriate information
in the form of semantic web rules and OWL-DL [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref15">15</xref>
        ] ontologies.
At the same time, rule engines are employed to facilitate
adaptation logic and decision making while mature UI
frameworks are employed to ensure a smooth user experience
[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        In terms of technology, mobile devices have currently achieved
the greatest amount of penetration within CHIs. Existing mobile
applications for CHIs fall into the following categories [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ]: (a)
45% provide guided tours of the CHIs in general; (b) 31% provide
guided tours of temporary exhibitions; (c) 8% provide
combinations of the first two; (d) 8% are applications devoted to a
single object; (e) 4% offer content creation or manipulation; and
(f) 3% are games.
      </p>
      <p>Although much work has been done to date, there are several
limitation to the approaches currently followed for facilitating
CH within CHIs. Major improvements are considered: (a) the
support of multi user interaction, (b) content personalization, (c)
facilitation of structured knowledge (based on existing domain
standards) and (d) scalability and extensibility. To provide the
above, an augmented digital exhibit should be designed and
implemented to be: (a) generic, built on top of an ontology
metamodel (extending CIDOC-CRM) to present two dimensional
paintings including the appropriate tools to support the
integration, annotation, and preparation of knowledge, (b)
available to a large number of visitors concurrently (using smart
phones, digital projections, interactive captions and hand held
tablet devices), (c) personalizable using mobile devices for
information displays through a user profile so as to adapt content
and presentation and (d) adaptable facilitating a rule engine to
execute UI adaptation rules resulting to the optimum UI variation
for each user.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>3. Scenario of use</title>
      <p>
        One of the personas [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref23">22</xref>
        ] used during the conceptual design of the
exhibit was Anna, who has a non-professional interest in art, but
is an art lover enjoying visiting museum, galleries, etc. Anna
decides to take a visit to the local Museum of Art. While entering
the museum towards the exhibition, a notification appears on her
mobile device prompting her to download the mobile client. She
also takes a minutes to fill in an anonymous profile (see figure 2).
Within the museum her mobile device is used as a navigator
allowing her to access information by scanning QR codes (see
figure 4-3). When Anna approaches an exhibit, she notices that
information is projected on the periphery of the painting, while a
tablet is unobtrusively located in front as an interactive caption
(see figure 4-2). Anna can use touch for navigating and browsing
the vast collection of information available for the specific exhibit
using the tablet. She also shows the QR code representation of her
profile to the caption (or any other component of the exhibit) so as
to access personalised information (Anna has painting as a hobby
and loves learning about materials and techniques used by the old
masters). She also notices that the UI of the caption is altered
allowing her to slide through representations (as an expert user of
mobile devices see figure 4-6).
      </p>
      <p>When she stands in front of the digital painting, an interactive
menu appears allowing her to start interacting with the specific
exhibit. She can use her hands to indicate points of interest within
the painting to get additional information (see figure 4-5). She can
also use gestures for zooming in and out specific regions of the
painting and therefore accessing details that are typically lost
when digitized artefacts are presented in their entirety at low
resolution. Anna also wonders what happens when more than one
person is accessing the same exhibit. In the room she sees several
people standing in front of a large painting and all seem to be
actively engaged while also noticing that an elderly user is
required only to locate himself in front of a painting so as to get
information. Alternatively, when approaching a physical exhibit,
she gets informed that she can use one of the tablets located on a
stand on each side of the exhibit to access personalised
information based on her location in front of the painting.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>4. A Distributed Architecture to support content and UI adaptation in CHIs</title>
      <p>
        Four main goals are addressed in the proposed architecture (see
figure 1): (a) model the knowledge facilitated by the system
(artefacts, users and context), (b) provide facilities within a
distributed environment (consisting of applications, devices and
sensors), (c) provide personalised information to users based on
their preferences and (d) perform task and UI adaptation.
The Content Personalisation Engine (figure 1-A) employs the Art
meta-model, which is an extension of the CIDOC CRM [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref13">13</xref>
        ], to
represent two dimensional paintings. The model is populated with
the help of a purposefully developed authoring tool and currently
contains 300 paintings by 30 world known artists. Additionally,
the User Profile model of the engine contains attributes used to
personalise information to visitors. These models are exported to
the higher levels of the architecture through a set of programming
language classes (c#, java protégé data export facilities) and two
sparql query (c# using SemWeb.Net and java using Jena and
Pellet). A number of alternative implementations were created to
support multiple development platforms and thus ensure the
reusability of the Content Personalisation Engine. Finally, the
multi-scale image repository stores and serves through an IIS web
server images in extremely large resolutions and their
representation in xml to be used for deep zooming into digital
artefacts.
      </p>
      <p>The Computer Vision Infrastructure (figure 1-B) is built on top of
the Microsoft Kinect SDK to support a number of alternative
interaction styles (hand - skeleton tracking, gestures and postures
recognition). At the same level lies the zxing library for
generating and scanning of QR codes.</p>
      <p>
        The service oriented communication protocol (figure 1-C) built on
top of the FORTH’s Famine middleware [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ] (a distributed
service oriented middleware that supports all popular
programming languages exposing a common event model and
service discovery and invocation mechanism), provides a common
dialect for applications to coexist and communicate in the context
of the developed application scenarios while using sensing for
decision making. The existence of a common communication
protocol was essential in order to allow a number of standalone
and heterogeneous applications running on alternative devices
(desktop pc, Windows phone device, Windows tablet) to
communicate (exchange messages and events) at runtime using a
commonly understood dialect.
      </p>
      <p>The UI Adaptation engine (figure 1-D) has the responsibility of
producing adaptation decisions using the Windows Workflow
Foundation Rules. WWF rules engine was selected both for
simplicity of implementation and because it is light weight in
conjunction to other rules engines. Furthermore it allows the
separation of the adaptation logic with the UI functionality that
implements adaptations in each UI instance. For each application
a set of rules has been defined. These rules are modeled separately
from the interface itself and the adaptation engine carries out the
task of chaining an interactive application with its rules and user
profile to perform adaptation.</p>
      <p>Finally, the Applications (figure 1-E), which extract functionality
from services, are targeted to different devices and application
frameworks and are interconnected at runtime to form
personalized application scenarios.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>5. The Augmented Personalised Exhibit</title>
      <p>The Augmented Personalized Exhibit provides interaction where
no interaction exists (making physical artefacts interactive) and
provides interactive digital artefacts where no artefacts exist
(importing both an artefact and the means to interact with it within
the CHI experience). The exhibit comprises a number of devices
for content provision as well as a number of modalities for
interaction. As shown in Figure 4, the main section of the
exhibition wall is occupied by a digital representation of an
exhibit in two variations. The first variation is a fully digital
exhibit where the exhibit itself is projected through the usage of a
short throw projector, while the second one is an actual physical
painting. In both cases skeletal tracking technology is installed on
the exhibit for tracking the location and distance of visitors. The
installed tracking technology supports the presentation of
information about points of interest using body tracking (two
visitors supported on the body tracking mode while three are
supported for the hand tracking). On the rear sides of the exhibit
two tablets are mounted on the wall or on two portable stands to
act as the captions of the painting. The captions based on the
visitor profiles present a multitude of information such as
description, videos, points of interests, deep zoom representation
of the painting, full artefact info and information from external
sources. These tablets are also equipped with embedded web
cameras for QR code recognition. Visitors’ mobile phones are
used for accessing information about the exhibit by scanning the
QR codes (from the captions). Portable tablets, rented or carried
by visitors, can be also be employed as information displays.
Currently each installation supports a single digital or physical
exhibit and a variation of devices (project, mobile phones, tablets
etc.). Each visitor can select the device to be used for interaction
but there is no control over the artefact to interact with.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>5.1 Content Personalization</title>
      <p>The content personalisation workflow is initialised by the
installation of the mobile client to a visitor’s cell phone. When the
application launches, the user is prompted to fill-in an anonymous
user profile (see figure 2).
User selections are stored in the smart phone’s local storage to
ensure that no confidential information is transmitted over the
web (although the profile is anonymous malicious software may
be possible to relate other services running on the mobile phone
e.g. GPS and social media with the transmitted profile data and
thus infer the identity of the user). This profile is used for
presenting personalised information from the smart phone. All
queries formed by the mobile application to the ontology model
carry with them the required profile attributes and the QR code of
the exhibit scanned by the user. Users can use the mobile client to
generate a QR code representation of the profile that is in turn
scanned by other interactive applications so as to identify user
preferences. For example, the user can shows the QR code
generated from his mobile phone to the mounted caption or the
exhibit itself, and the exhibit personalises the information to the
profile selections of the user. The overall workflow is presented in
figure 3.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>5.2 UI adaptation</title>
      <p>Each interactive application comes to its initialisation state by
retrieving and executing default application specific rules from the
rules store. A QR recognition service is initiated and runs on the
background. Each of the users can in turn use their Smartphone to
generate the QR code representation of their profile, and point this
representation to the application so as to transfer their preferences
to the application. The transmitted preferences are used to alter
several application properties. This results in the re-evaluation of
the rules by the rule engine and the generation of adaptation
decisions that are directly transferred from the Rules Engine to the
application. The result is the generation of an adapted UI that
matches the user preferences as recorded to the profile.</p>
      <p>The tablet browser used to
access information based on
current location of the user in
front of the physical exhibit
One of the alternative views of
the caption showing a relevant
video</p>
      <p>The digital exhibit shows
information about POIs based on
the location of the visitor’s hand
The mobile client used to access
information using QR code
scanning</p>
      <p>The mobile client used to
personalize the caption of a
painting (Top: filling the profile;
bottom: QR code representation
of the profile)</p>
      <p>Figure 4. The interactive digital exhibit
An example of this process is shown in figure 5. On the top left
of the picture is the screen from the mobile emulator where the
user is entering his profile. On the top right of the picture is the
QR code generated based on the user’s profile and on the bottom
left side is the QR code profile scanning mechanism that is
running on the artefact caption. The resulted adapted caption is
shown on the bottom right side of the same picture. Another
example is shown on figure 4-1 where the user is not experienced
with technology so skeletal tracking is employed to automatically
identify his/her position and present information inline. On the
contrary in figure 4-5 the user is expert so hand tracking is
employed to allow him to fully explore the exhibit.</p>
      <p>In the case of multiple users a mixed adaptation process is
followed. The profiles of all users are merged and the most
appropriate representation of the exhibit is presented to cover
possibly all users. Further research is required so as to mark with
computer vision algorithms each user and thus allow the per user
adaption of the interactive exhibits.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>6. Evaluation</title>
      <p>
        The evaluation exhibit has been tested with usability experts and
subsequently with visitors. The expert based evaluation was
conducted by three usability experts. A scoring scale from 0 (not a
usability problem) to 4 (usability catastrophe) was used [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref14">14</xref>
        ].
Thirty issues were identified in total, and twelve of them were
considered major usability problems. The user-based evaluation
session was performed with the participation of ten users.
Concerning the participants’ gender, it came out that more male
users participated in the evaluation, in percentage 60%. Regarding
the age of the participants the majority (7 users) was between 20
and 29 years old, also having 2 users within the age group of
3039 and another one on the 40-49 age group. Five users where
experts regarding the usage of ICT (both desktop and mobile
devices) while the remaining where moderately experienced and
one user had limited experience. Users were requested to fill in a
pre-test questionnaire containing demographic information and
questions to collect data regarding the usage of ICT technology
within CHIs. Upon completion of this process, users were
requested to carry out a number of interaction scenarios and then
fill in a post-test questionnaire. The user based evaluation was
conducted within a room in the AmI facility of ICS-FORTH that
was appropriately set up to host the implemented interactive
digital exhibit.. User interaction was recorded for offline
processing.
      </p>
      <p>The results gathered through the post-test questionnaire were
used to calculate four factors, namely the overall user satisfaction,
the satisfaction of users when using the system, the quality of the
provided information and the satisfaction regarding the interface
provided by the system. Regarding overall user satisfaction, ~87%
of the users are within the range 5 to 7, while 30.56% of the users
provided a grade of 7 to all questions. However, ~5% of the users
stated that they were not satisfied. Regarding user satisfaction
when using the system, ~85% of the users are within the range 5
to 7, while ~37% of the users provided a grade of 7 to all
questions. However, ~14% of the users stated that they were little
to medium satisfied. Regarding information quality, ~88% of the
users are within the range 5 to 7, while ~25% of the users
provided a grade of 7 to all questions. However, ~43% of the
users scored 6, which implies that there is a substantial amount of
users who faced some form of difficulty understanding the
presented information. Finally, the user interface of the system,
~83% of the users are within the range 5 to 7, while ~35% of the
users provided a grade of 7 to all questions. However, ~25% of
the users scored 5 and ~24% scored 6, which implies the existence
of some form of usability barriers. The results of the
aforementioned quality factors provided some initial indications
about potential areas of improvement. To identify those areas
more clearly further post processing was conducted. The
questions where grouped into four categories, analysed both
individually and by category:
• General User Satisfaction: Analyzing the comments provided
by users in the questions used to calculate general user
satisfaction several new research directions became prominent.
In some cases users may require specialized curation for some
digital assets, especially in the case where the digital asset is
linked to a myth or a historic event. In such cases, the system
should support the curators into the process of revealing the
myth out of the artefact, providing extra historic information or
even building a story to be told. These new directions highlight
the need for concrete strategies towards curating digital assets.
• Interaction techniques: The hand tracking interaction
technique scored lower grades in relation to body tracking and
touch (~55% of the users scored 5 regarding hand-mirrored
hand synchronizations and ~44% scored 5 for hand-based
content navigation). On the contrary, body tracking and touch
have better results.
• Information representation &amp; extraction: Users were in
general very satisfied (~85% scored from 5 to 7 in all
questions of this group). Nevertheless there, is a percentage of
~55% who are not fully satisfied regarding the way that
information is browsed in general. In this sense, 33% scored 5
•
the way that information is presented using body tracking,
~44% scored 6 for the mobile client, while ~55% scored 6 in
the caption.</p>
      <p>UI Adaptation: Regarding the ways that the UI of the system
are adapted, users were in general satisfied (~70% scored from
5 to 7 in all questions), but there was a substantial number of
users that were not fully satisfied with the way that the system
was adapted to map their selected profile. In their comments,
some of the users documented that for example they preferred
to slide the different screens of the digital caption but based on
their profile next and previous buttons appeared. Such cases
are typical examples when performing profile based adaptation
and are typically restored by integrating an additional
personalisation layer to the system. In this layer the user
overrides the default decisions made by the system to fine tune
the interface to best suit his/her personal preferences.
Especially in the case of Heritage Institutions where visitors
have limited time to configure a provided interface integrating
such a layer does not seams a good idea. The usability experts
proposed a more intelligent way of solving such issues by
introducing the possibility of runtime adaptation based on user
input. For example in the case of navigation buttons a message
could appear to the user: “Switch to slide by just sliding your
finger over the screen”. In such a case the user can perform the
personalisation part while browsing information.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>7. Discussion and future work</title>
      <p>This work expands the current state of the art in the context of
augmented exhibits within CHIs in a number of directions. The
proposed digital exhibit integrates a number of alternative devices
and interaction metaphors to facilitate simultaneous multi user
access to paintings. Moreover, focus is put back to art itself rather
than providing just another exhibit in the CHI. In the same context
visitor’s interaction capabilities, technology expertise and art
knowledge are used for applying content personalisation and UI
adaptation coping with the diversity of the target user population
within CHIs. User acceptance and satisfaction factors were
measured by conducting a user based evaluation within an in-vitro
installation of the proposed approach. Practical exploitation of the
concept within CHIs is currently being considered.</p>
      <p>Regarding future research directions the user based evaluation of
the produced significant input regarding how this research work
can be improved and what are the aspects that should be
improved. A possible direction further to the ones identified
during the evaluation is the introduction of social features to the
interactive digital exhibit thus being able to capture user feedback.
Such feedback could be exploited through of line processing to
enhance the provided information with user extracted info thus
producing a more pluralistic view on art.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-10">
      <title>Acknowledgments</title>
      <p>This work is supported by the FORTH-ICS internal RTD
Programme 'Ambient Intelligence and Smart Environments'.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2001</year>
          ).
          <article-title>The concept of Unified User Interfaces</article-title>
          . In C. Stephanidis (Ed.),
          <source>User Interfaces for All - Concepts</source>
          , Methods, and Tools. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp.
          <fpage>371</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>388</lpage>
          (ISBN 0-8058-2967-9).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Savidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Unified user interface development: the software engineering of universally accessible interactions</article-title>
          .
          <source>Universal Access in the Information Society</source>
          ,
          <volume>3</volume>
          (
          <issue>3-4</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>165</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>193</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Human Factors in Ambient Intelligence Environments</article-title>
          . In G. Salvendy (Ed.),
          <source>Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics (4th Edition)</source>
          ,
          <source>Chapter</source>
          <volume>49</volume>
          (pp.
          <fpage>1354</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>1373</lpage>
          ). USA: John Wiley and Sons.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          [4]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Falk</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Koran</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dierking</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L. D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Dreblow</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1985</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Predicting visitor behavior</article-title>
          .
          <source>Curator: The Museum Journal</source>
          ,
          <volume>28</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>249</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>258</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          [5]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Serrell</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1998</year>
          ). Paying Attention: Visitors and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Museum</given-names>
            <surname>Exhibitions</surname>
          </string-name>
          . American Association of Museums, Washington, DC.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          [6]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bimber</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Coriand</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kleppe</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bruns</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zollmann</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Langlotz</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2006</year>
          ,
          <article-title>July)</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>Superimposing pictorial artwork with projected imagery</article-title>
          .
          <source>In ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Courses</source>
          (p.
          <fpage>10</fpage>
          ). ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          [7]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Kortbek</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K. J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Grønbaek</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          ,
          <article-title>October)</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>Interactive spatial multimedia for communication of art in the physical museum space</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 16th ACM international conference on Multimedia</source>
          (pp.
          <fpage>609</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>618</lpage>
          ). ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          [8]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hornecker</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stifter</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2006</year>
          .
          <article-title>Learning from interactive museum installations about interaction design for public settings</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of OZCHI '06</source>
          ,
          <fpage>135</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>142</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          [9]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ferris</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bannon</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ciolfi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gallagher</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hall</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Lennon</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Shaping experiences in the hunt museum: a design case study</article-title>
          .
          <source>In: Proceedings of DIS</source>
          <year>2004</year>
          , pp.
          <fpage>205</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>214</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          [10]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Robertson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mansfield</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Loke</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <year>2006</year>
          .
          <article-title>Designing an immersive environment for public use</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of PDC '06. ACM</source>
          , New York, NY,
          <fpage>31</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>40</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          [11]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Economou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Meintani</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Promising beginnings? Evaluating museum mobile phone apps</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Rethinking Technology in Museums Conference Proceedings</source>
          (pp.
          <fpage>26</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>27</lpage>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          [12]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Georgalis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Grammenos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Middleware for Ambient Intelligence Environments: Reviewing Requirements and Communication Technologies</article-title>
          . In: Stephanidis,
          <string-name>
            <surname>C</surname>
          </string-name>
          . (ed.)
          <source>UAHCI</source>
          <year>2009</year>
          ,
          <article-title>Part II</article-title>
          . LNCS, vol.
          <volume>5615</volume>
          , pp.
          <fpage>168</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>177</lpage>
          . Springer, Heidelberg (
          <year>2009</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          [13]
          <article-title>Definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model</article-title>
          : http://www.cidoc-crm.org/docs/cidoc_crm_
          <source>version_5</source>
          .1- draft-2013May.pdf
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref14">
        <mixed-citation>
          [14]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Michou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bikakis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Patkos</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Antoniou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Plexousakis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
          <article-title>A Seman-tics-Based User Model for the Support of Personalized, Context-Aware Navigational Ser-vices</article-title>
          .
          <source>In First International Workshop on Ontologies in Interactive Systems</source>
          ,
          <year>2008</year>
          . ONTORACT '
          <volume>08</volume>
          . pp
          <fpage>41</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>50</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref15">
        <mixed-citation>
          [15]
          <string-name>
            <given-names>OWL</given-names>
            <surname>Web Ontology Language Reference</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <source>W3C Recommendation</source>
          , 10
          <year>February 2004</year>
          . http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/ (
          <year>2004</year>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref16">
        <mixed-citation>
          [16]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Karagiannidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Koumpis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>1997</year>
          ,
          <article-title>January)</article-title>
          .
          <article-title>Decision making in in-telligent user interfaces</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Intelligent user interfaces</source>
          (pp.
          <fpage>195</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>202</lpage>
          ). ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref17">
        <mixed-citation>
          [17]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2001</year>
          )
          <article-title>The concept of Unified User Interfaces</article-title>
          . In C. Stephanidis (Ed.),
          <article-title>Us-er Interfaces for All - Concepts, Methods, and Tools</article-title>
          . Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum As-sociates, pp.
          <fpage>371</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>388</lpage>
          (ISBN 0-8058-2967-9).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref18">
        <mixed-citation>
          [18]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2001</year>
          ).
          <article-title>New Perspectives into Human - Computer Interaction</article-title>
          . In C. Stephanidis (Ed.),
          <source>User Interfaces for All - Concepts</source>
          , Methods, and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tools</surname>
          </string-name>
          (pp.
          <fpage>3</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>20</lpage>
          ).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref19">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mahwah</surname>
          </string-name>
          , NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
          <source>(ISBN 0-8058- 2967-9</source>
          , 760 pages).
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref20">
        <mixed-citation>
          [19]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Doulgeraki</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Partarakis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Mourouzis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
          <article-title>A Development Toolkit for Unified Web-Based User Interfaces</article-title>
          .
          <source>Computers Helping People with Special Needs</source>
          ,
          <year>2008</year>
          , pp
          <fpage>346</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>353</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref21">
        <mixed-citation>
          [20]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Savidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Antona</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2005</year>
          , in print).
          <article-title>A Decision-Making Specifica-tion Language for Verifiable User-Interface Adaptation Logic</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering.</source>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref22">
        <mixed-citation>
          [21]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Partarakis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Doulgeraki</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Leonidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Antona</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stephanidis</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2009</year>
          ).
          <article-title>User interface adaptation of webbased services on the semantic web</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Intelligent and Ubiquitous Interaction Environments</source>
          (pp.
          <fpage>711</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>719</lpage>
          ). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref23">
        <mixed-citation>
          [22]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zimmermann</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Vanderheiden</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Accessible design and testing in the application development process: considerations for an integrated approach</article-title>
          .
          <source>Universal Access in the Information Society</source>
          ,
          <volume>7</volume>
          (
          <issue>1-2</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>117</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>128</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>