=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1621/paper1
|storemode=property
|title=Adaptation and Content Personalization in the Context of Multi User Museum Exhibits
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1621/paper1.pdf
|volume=Vol-1621
|authors=Nikolaos Partarakis,Margherita Antona,Emmanouil Zidianakis,Constantine Stephanidis
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/avi/PartarakisAZS16
}}
==Adaptation and Content Personalization in the Context of Multi User Museum Exhibits==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1621/paper1.pdf
Adaptation and content personalization in the context of
multi user museum exhibits
Nikolaos Partarakis Margherita Antona
Foundation for Research and Technology – Hellas Foundation for Research and Technology – Hellas
(FORTH) (FORTH)
Institute of Computer Science (ICS) Institute of Computer Science (ICS)
N. Plastira 100 N. Plastira 100
Heraklion - Crete, GR 70013 Greece Heraklion - Crete, GR 70013 Greece
partarak@ics.forth.gr antona@ics.forth.gr
Emmanouil Zidianakis Constantine Stephanidis
Foundation for Research and Technology – Hellas Foundation for Research and Technology – Hellas
(FORTH) (FORTH)
Institute of Computer Science (ICS) Institute of Computer Science (ICS)
N. Plastira 100 N. Plastira 100
Heraklion - Crete, GR 70013 Greece Heraklion - Crete, GR 70013 Greece
zidian@ics.forth.gr cs@ics.forth.gr
University of Crete, Department of Computer Science
ABSTRACT distributed system to the requirements and preferences of a
diverse user population is a major issue. This work explores the
Two dimensional paintings are exhibited in museums and art penetration of AmI technology within the domain of Cultural
galleries in the same manner since at least three centuries. Heritage and more specifically CHIs through the proposal of
However, the emergence of novel interaction techniques and augmented exhibits that can be displayed in a standalone way or
metaphors provides the opportunity to change this status quo, by supplement an actual physical artifact. In this context the need of
supporting mixing physical and digital Cultural Heritage personalization is important, so as to deliver the most appropriate
experiences. This paper presents the design and implementation of information to visitors, thus making some form of interaction
a technological framework based on Ambient Intelligence to adaptation a necessity. This work builds on and revisits the
enhance visitor experiences within Cultural Heritage Institutions approach to UI adaptation proposed in [1], [2], so as to provide
(CHIs) by augmenting two dimensional paintings. Among the dialogue and task adaptation, content personalization and
major contributions of this research work is the support of reasoning within CHIs facilitating novel means of accessing art,
personalized multi user access to exhibits, facilitating also and in particular two- dimensional paintings.
adaptation mechanisms for altering the interaction style and
content to the requirements of each CHI visitor. A standards 2. Background
compliant knowledge representation and the appropriate authoring Nowadays CHIs strive to design and implement interactive
tools guarantee the effective integration of this approach in the exhibitions that offer enjoyable and educational experiences.
CHI context. However, designing such an exhibition is not an easy task,
because most visitors might visit only once, and a typical visit
CCS Concepts only lasts for a very short time [4], [5]. To address such issues
•Human-centered computing~Ambient intelligence interactive exhibits are often employed as a means of providing
•Human-centered computing~Mixed / augmented reality alternative experiences. Such exhibits can be broadly classified in
Keywords four categories: (a) hybrid exhibits which aim at augmenting an
artifact with graphics [6] or audio commentaries [7]; (b) side
J.5 (Fine arts), H.5.1 (Artificial, augmented, and virtual realities) exhibits which are placed adjacent to a real exhibit, providing
indirect exploration of, and interaction with it [8]; (c) isolated, but
linked, exhibits having “a conceptual affinity with the original
1. Introduction artwork”; they are related to a real exhibit but installed in
Ambient Intelligence (AmI) presents a vision of a technological
separate, dedicated, locations [7], [9]; and (d) stand-alone
environment capable of reacting in an attentive, adaptive and
exhibits containing content related to an exhibition, but not
active (sometimes proactive) way to the presence and activities of
directly linked to an artifact [10].
humans and objects in order to provide appropriate services to its
inhabitants [3]. In the context of AmI, the need to adapt a 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
Copyright © 2016 for this paper by its authors. Copying permitted for some form of intelligence in the way that UIs are built and
private and academic purposes. 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 information is projected on the periphery of the painting, while a
strategy [16]. The provision of these qualities within CHIs entails tablet is unobtrusively located in front as an interactive caption
the need to address design issues far more complex than those (see figure 4-2). Anna can use touch for navigating and browsing
faced by traditional HCI. To address similar needs, a user the vast collection of information available for the specific exhibit
interface adaptation methodology has been proposed as a using the tablet. She also shows the QR code representation of her
complete technological solution for supporting universal access of profile to the caption (or any other component of the exhibit) so as
interactive applications and services [17]. This methodology to access personalised information (Anna has painting as a hobby
conveyed a new perspective into the development of user and loves learning about materials and techniques used by the old
interfaces, providing a principled and systematic approach masters). She also notices that the UI of the caption is altered
towards coping with diversity in the target user requirements, allowing her to slide through representations (as an expert user of
tasks and environments of use [18]. Several UI adaptation mobile devices see figure 4-6).
frameworks have been proposed implementing the When she stands in front of the digital painting, an interactive
aforementioned development methodology, such as for example menu appears allowing her to start interacting with the specific
the EAGER framework [19] that allows Web developers to build exhibit. She can use her hands to indicate points of interest within
adaptive applications. In these prior approaches knowledge about the painting to get additional information (see figure 4-5). She can
users was either statically represented or acquired through formal also use gestures for zooming in and out specific regions of the
specifications using special purpose programming languages [20]. painting and therefore accessing details that are typically lost
These ad-hoc approaches are currently replaced through the usage when digitized artefacts are presented in their entirety at low
of knowledge modelled with the help of a web ontology language resolution. Anna also wonders what happens when more than one
such as OWL [21]. Such models store the appropriate information person is accessing the same exhibit. In the room she sees several
in the form of semantic web rules and OWL-DL [15] ontologies. people standing in front of a large painting and all seem to be
At the same time, rule engines are employed to facilitate actively engaged while also noticing that an elderly user is
adaptation logic and decision making while mature UI required only to locate himself in front of a painting so as to get
frameworks are employed to ensure a smooth user experience information. Alternatively, when approaching a physical exhibit,
[14]. she gets informed that she can use one of the tablets located on a
In terms of technology, mobile devices have currently achieved stand on each side of the exhibit to access personalised
the greatest amount of penetration within CHIs. Existing mobile information based on her location in front of the painting.
applications for CHIs fall into the following categories [11]: (a)
45% provide guided tours of the CHIs in general; (b) 31% provide
4. A Distributed Architecture to support
guided tours of temporary exhibitions; (c) 8% provide content and UI adaptation in CHIs
combinations of the first two; (d) 8% are applications devoted to a Four main goals are addressed in the proposed architecture (see
single object; (e) 4% offer content creation or manipulation; and figure 1): (a) model the knowledge facilitated by the system
(f) 3% are games. (artefacts, users and context), (b) provide facilities within a
distributed environment (consisting of applications, devices and
Although much work has been done to date, there are several
sensors), (c) provide personalised information to users based on
limitation to the approaches currently followed for facilitating
their preferences and (d) perform task and UI adaptation.
CH within CHIs. Major improvements are considered: (a) the
support of multi user interaction, (b) content personalization, (c) The Content Personalisation Engine (figure 1-A) employs the Art
facilitation of structured knowledge (based on existing domain meta-model, which is an extension of the CIDOC CRM [13], to
standards) and (d) scalability and extensibility. To provide the represent two dimensional paintings. The model is populated with
above, an augmented digital exhibit should be designed and the help of a purposefully developed authoring tool and currently
implemented to be: (a) generic, built on top of an ontology meta- contains 300 paintings by 30 world known artists. Additionally,
model (extending CIDOC-CRM) to present two dimensional the User Profile model of the engine contains attributes used to
paintings including the appropriate tools to support the personalise information to visitors. These models are exported to
integration, annotation, and preparation of knowledge, (b) the higher levels of the architecture through a set of programming
available to a large number of visitors concurrently (using smart language classes (c#, java protégé data export facilities) and two
phones, digital projections, interactive captions and hand held sparql query (c# using SemWeb.Net and java using Jena and
tablet devices), (c) personalizable using mobile devices for Pellet). A number of alternative implementations were created to
information displays through a user profile so as to adapt content support multiple development platforms and thus ensure the
and presentation and (d) adaptable facilitating a rule engine to reusability of the Content Personalisation Engine. Finally, the
execute UI adaptation rules resulting to the optimum UI variation multi-scale image repository stores and serves through an IIS web
for each user. server images in extremely large resolutions and their
representation in xml to be used for deep zooming into digital
3. Scenario of use artefacts.
One of the personas [22] used during the conceptual design of the
The Computer Vision Infrastructure (figure 1-B) is built on top of
exhibit was Anna, who has a non-professional interest in art, but
the Microsoft Kinect SDK to support a number of alternative
is an art lover enjoying visiting museum, galleries, etc. Anna
interaction styles (hand - skeleton tracking, gestures and postures
decides to take a visit to the local Museum of Art. While entering
recognition). At the same level lies the zxing library for
the museum towards the exhibition, a notification appears on her
generating and scanning of QR codes.
mobile device prompting her to download the mobile client. She
also takes a minutes to fill in an anonymous profile (see figure 2). The service oriented communication protocol (figure 1-C) built on
Within the museum her mobile device is used as a navigator top of the FORTH’s Famine middleware [12] (a distributed
allowing her to access information by scanning QR codes (see service oriented middleware that supports all popular
figure 4-3). When Anna approaches an exhibit, she notices that programming languages exposing a common event model and
service discovery and invocation mechanism), provides a common of the painting, full artefact info and information from external
dialect for applications to coexist and communicate in the context sources. These tablets are also equipped with embedded web
of the developed application scenarios while using sensing for cameras for QR code recognition. Visitors’ mobile phones are
decision making. The existence of a common communication used for accessing information about the exhibit by scanning the
protocol was essential in order to allow a number of standalone QR codes (from the captions). Portable tablets, rented or carried
and heterogeneous applications running on alternative devices by visitors, can be also be employed as information displays.
(desktop pc, Windows phone device, Windows tablet) to Currently each installation supports a single digital or physical
communicate (exchange messages and events) at runtime using a exhibit and a variation of devices (project, mobile phones, tablets
commonly understood dialect. etc.). Each visitor can select the device to be used for interaction
The UI Adaptation engine (figure 1-D) has the responsibility of but there is no control over the artefact to interact with.
producing adaptation decisions using the Windows Workflow
Foundation Rules. WWF rules engine was selected both for 5.1 Content Personalization
simplicity of implementation and because it is light weight in The content personalisation workflow is initialised by the
conjunction to other rules engines. Furthermore it allows the installation of the mobile client to a visitor’s cell phone. When the
separation of the adaptation logic with the UI functionality that application launches, the user is prompted to fill-in an anonymous
implements adaptations in each UI instance. For each application user profile (see figure 2).
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.
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.
Figure 2. User profile screen
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
Figure 1. Abstract service oriented architecture generate a QR code representation of the profile that is in turn
scanned by other interactive applications so as to identify user
5. The Augmented Personalised Exhibit preferences. For example, the user can shows the QR code
The Augmented Personalized Exhibit provides interaction where generated from his mobile phone to the mounted caption or the
no interaction exists (making physical artefacts interactive) and exhibit itself, and the exhibit personalises the information to the
provides interactive digital artefacts where no artefacts exist profile selections of the user. The overall workflow is presented in
(importing both an artefact and the means to interact with it within figure 3.
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 Figure 3. Content personalization workflow
description, videos, points of interests, deep zoom representation
5.2 UI adaptation
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 The mobile client used to access
information using QR code The mobile client used to
decisions that are directly transferred from the Rules Engine to the scanning
application. The result is the generation of an adapted UI that personalize the caption of a
matches the user preferences as recorded to the profile. painting (Top: filling the profile;
bottom: QR code representation
of the profile)
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.
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.
The digital exhibit shows
The tablet browser used to
information about POIs based
access information based on
on the location of the visitor
current location of the user in
front of the physical exhibit
Figure 5. Adaptation example (Top left: Profile editing, Top right:
One of the alternative views of
the caption showing a relevant The digital exhibit shows generation of a QR code representation of the profile, Bottom Left the
video information about POIs based on caption is scanning the QR code, Bottom Right: The caption is adapted
the location of the visitor’s hand
6. Evaluation
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 [14].
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 way that information is presented using body tracking,
the age of the participants the majority (7 users) was between 20 ~44% scored 6 for the mobile client, while ~55% scored 6 in
and 29 years old, also having 2 users within the age group of 30- the caption.
39 and another one on the 40-49 age group. Five users where • UI Adaptation: Regarding the ways that the UI of the system
experts regarding the usage of ICT (both desktop and mobile are adapted, users were in general satisfied (~70% scored from
devices) while the remaining where moderately experienced and 5 to 7 in all questions), but there was a substantial number of
one user had limited experience. Users were requested to fill in a users that were not fully satisfied with the way that the system
pre-test questionnaire containing demographic information and was adapted to map their selected profile. In their comments,
questions to collect data regarding the usage of ICT technology some of the users documented that for example they preferred
within CHIs. Upon completion of this process, users were to slide the different screens of the digital caption but based on
requested to carry out a number of interaction scenarios and then their profile next and previous buttons appeared. Such cases
fill in a post-test questionnaire. The user based evaluation was are typical examples when performing profile based adaptation
conducted within a room in the AmI facility of ICS-FORTH that and are typically restored by integrating an additional
was appropriately set up to host the implemented interactive personalisation layer to the system. In this layer the user
digital exhibit.. User interaction was recorded for offline overrides the default decisions made by the system to fine tune
processing. the interface to best suit his/her personal preferences.
The results gathered through the post-test questionnaire were Especially in the case of Heritage Institutions where visitors
used to calculate four factors, namely the overall user satisfaction, have limited time to configure a provided interface integrating
the satisfaction of users when using the system, the quality of the such a layer does not seams a good idea. The usability experts
provided information and the satisfaction regarding the interface proposed a more intelligent way of solving such issues by
provided by the system. Regarding overall user satisfaction, ~87% introducing the possibility of runtime adaptation based on user
of the users are within the range 5 to 7, while 30.56% of the users input. For example in the case of navigation buttons a message
provided a grade of 7 to all questions. However, ~5% of the users could appear to the user: “Switch to slide by just sliding your
stated that they were not satisfied. Regarding user satisfaction finger over the screen”. In such a case the user can perform the
when using the system, ~85% of the users are within the range 5 personalisation part while browsing information.
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 7. Discussion and future work
to medium satisfied. Regarding information quality, ~88% of the This work expands the current state of the art in the context of
users are within the range 5 to 7, while ~25% of the users augmented exhibits within CHIs in a number of directions. The
provided a grade of 7 to all questions. However, ~43% of the proposed digital exhibit integrates a number of alternative devices
users scored 6, which implies that there is a substantial amount of and interaction metaphors to facilitate simultaneous multi user
users who faced some form of difficulty understanding the access to paintings. Moreover, focus is put back to art itself rather
presented information. Finally, the user interface of the system, than providing just another exhibit in the CHI. In the same context
~83% of the users are within the range 5 to 7, while ~35% of the visitor’s interaction capabilities, technology expertise and art
users provided a grade of 7 to all questions. However, ~25% of knowledge are used for applying content personalisation and UI
the users scored 5 and ~24% scored 6, which implies the existence adaptation coping with the diversity of the target user population
of some form of usability barriers. The results of the within CHIs. User acceptance and satisfaction factors were
aforementioned quality factors provided some initial indications measured by conducting a user based evaluation within an in-vitro
about potential areas of improvement. To identify those areas installation of the proposed approach. Practical exploitation of the
more clearly further post processing was conducted. The concept within CHIs is currently being considered.
questions where grouped into four categories, analysed both Regarding future research directions the user based evaluation of
individually and by category: the produced significant input regarding how this research work
can be improved and what are the aspects that should be
• General User Satisfaction: Analyzing the comments provided
improved. A possible direction further to the ones identified
by users in the questions used to calculate general user
during the evaluation is the introduction of social features to the
satisfaction several new research directions became prominent.
interactive digital exhibit thus being able to capture user feedback.
In some cases users may require specialized curation for some
Such feedback could be exploited through of line processing to
digital assets, especially in the case where the digital asset is
enhance the provided information with user extracted info thus
linked to a myth or a historic event. In such cases, the system producing a more pluralistic view on art.
should support the curators into the process of revealing the
myth out of the artefact, providing extra historic information or Acknowledgments
even building a story to be told. These new directions highlight This work is supported by the FORTH-ICS internal RTD
the need for concrete strategies towards curating digital assets. Programme 'Ambient Intelligence and Smart Environments'.
• Interaction techniques: The hand tracking interaction
technique scored lower grades in relation to body tracking and References
touch (~55% of the users scored 5 regarding hand-mirrored [1] Stephanidis, C. (2001). The concept of Unified User
hand synchronizations and ~44% scored 5 for hand-based Interfaces. In C. Stephanidis (Ed.), User Interfaces for All -
content navigation). On the contrary, body tracking and touch Concepts, Methods, and Tools. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
have better results. Erlbaum Associates, pp. 371-388 (ISBN 0-8058-2967-9).
• Information representation & extraction: Users were in
[2] Savidis, A., & Stephanidis, C. (2004). Unified user interface
general very satisfied (~85% scored from 5 to 7 in all
development: the software engineering of universally
questions of this group). Nevertheless there, is a percentage of accessible interactions. Universal Access in the Information
~55% who are not fully satisfied regarding the way that Society, 3(3-4), 165-193.
information is browsed in general. In this sense, 33% scored 5
[3] Stephanidis, C. (2012). Human Factors in Ambient Interfaces for All - Concepts, Methods, and Tools (pp. 3-20).
Intelligence Environments. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (ISBN 0-8058-
of Human Factors and Ergonomics (4th Edition), Chapter 49 2967-9, 760 pages).
(pp. 1354-1373). USA: John Wiley and Sons. [19] Doulgeraki, C., Partarakis, N., Mourouzis, A & Stephanidis,
[4] Falk, J. H., Koran, J. J., Dierking, L. D., & Dreblow, L. C. (2008). A Development Toolkit for Unified Web-Based
(1985). Predicting visitor behavior. Curator: The Museum User Interfaces. Computers Helping People with Special
Journal, 28(4), 249-258. Needs, 2008, pp 346-353
[5] Serrell, B. (1998). Paying Attention: Visitors and Museum [20] Savidis, A., Antona, M., & Stephanidis, C. (2005, in print). A
Exhibitions. American Association of Museums, Decision-Making Specifica-tion Language for Verifiable
Washington, DC. User-Interface Adaptation Logic. International Journal of
[6] Bimber, O., Coriand, F., Kleppe, A., Bruns, E., Zollmann, S., Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering.
& Langlotz, T. (2006, July). Superimposing pictorial artwork [21] Partarakis, N., Doulgeraki, C., Leonidis, A., Antona, M., &
with projected imagery. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2006 Courses Stephanidis, C. (2009). User interface adaptation of web-
(p. 10). ACM. based services on the semantic web. In Universal Access in
[7] Kortbek, K. J., & Grønbæk, K. (2008, October). Interactive Human-Computer Interaction. Intelligent and Ubiquitous
spatial multimedia for communication of art in the physical Interaction Environments (pp. 711-719). Springer Berlin
museum space. In Proceedings of the 16th ACM Heidelberg.
international conference on Multimedia (pp. 609-618). ACM. [22] Zimmermann, G., & Vanderheiden, G. (2008). Accessible
[8] Hornecker, E. and Stifter, M., 2006. Learning from design and testing in the application development process:
interactive museum installations about interaction design for considerations for an integrated approach. Universal Access
public settings. In Proceedings of OZCHI '06, 135-142 in the Information Society, 7(1-2), 117-128.
[9] Ferris, K., Bannon, L., Ciolfi, L., Gallagher, P., Hall, T.,
Lennon, M. (2004). Shaping experiences in the hunt
museum: a design case study. In: Proceedings of DIS 2004,
pp. 205-214.
[10] Robertson, T., Mansfield, T., and Loke, L., 2006. Designing
an immersive environment for public use. In Proceedings of
PDC '06. ACM, New York, NY, 31-40.
[11] Economou, M., & Meintani, E. (2011). Promising
beginnings? Evaluating museum mobile phone apps. In
Rethinking Technology in Museums Conference Proceedings
(pp. 26-27).
[12] Georgalis, Y., Grammenos, D., Stephanidis, C.: Middleware
for Ambient Intelligence Environments: Reviewing
Requirements and Communication Technologies. In:
Stephanidis, C. (ed.) UAHCI 2009, Part II. LNCS, vol. 5615,
pp. 168–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)
[13] Definition of the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model:
http://www.cidoc-crm.org/docs/cidoc_crm_version_5.1-
draft-2013May.pdf
[14] Michou, M., Bikakis, A., Patkos, T., Antoniou, G.,
Plexousakis, D.(2009). A Seman-tics-Based User Model for
the Support of Personalized, Context-Aware Navigational
Ser-vices. In First International Workshop on Ontologies in
Interactive Systems, 2008. ONTORACT '08. pp 41-50
[15] OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. W3C
Recommendation, 10 February 2004.
http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/ (2004).
[16] Stephanidis, C., Karagiannidis, C., & Koumpis, A. (1997,
January). Decision making in in-telligent user interfaces. In
Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on
Intelligent user interfaces (pp. 195-202). ACM.
[17] Stephanidis, C. (2001) The concept of Unified User
Interfaces. In C. Stephanidis (Ed.), Us-er Interfaces for All -
Concepts, Methods, and Tools. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum As-sociates, pp. 371-388 (ISBN 0-8058-2967-9).
[18] Stephanidis, C. (2001). New Perspectives into Human –
Computer Interaction. In C. Stephanidis (Ed.), User