<!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>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Institute of Informatics and Software Engineering,</string-name>
          <email>{ a n d r e j k o , b a r 1 a , b i e l i k , t v a r o z e k } @ f i i t . s t u b a . s k , W1MW home page: http : / /uuv. f iit . sruba. sk/-bj.etik/</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Faculty of Informatics and Information Technologies, Slovak university of Technology in Bratislava</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Ilkovidova 3. 842 16 Bratislava</addr-line>
          ,
          <country country="SK">Slovakia</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <fpage>103</fpage>
      <lpage>110</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>IVIany current web-based information systems need to adapt to individual user characteristics in order to streamline common tasks and enable users to use them efficiently. In this paper we describe an approach to user characteristics acquisition based on automatic analysis of user behavior thus minimizing the amount of necessary user involvement. We stress the importance of appropriate data collection and propose a novel approach to logging, in which we preserve the semantics of logged evelrts. This has a significant inrpact on the successive log analysis, which focuses on the estimation of user characteristics from user navigation.</p>
      </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>Present-day web-based information systems increasingly take advantage of
personalization as vitai means of streamlining user experience, which is seriously
hampered both due to the growing complexity of applications and the constantly
increasing size of the available information space. The demand for generic
adaptive systems results in the demand for generic methods and software tools, which
perform automatic construction and maintenance of individual users' models.
However, this is a compiex continuous process of acquisition of user data and its
processing with the corresponding user model update.</p>
      <p>Our primary goal was to devise methods for automatic gathering of user
characteristics with minimal user involvement that can be successfully employed
for personalized navigation, content recommendation and/or filtering in a
particular dornain (such as job ofi'ers or scientific publications). Consequently, wc
deviscd ntethods that first acquire data about user behavior by observirrg user
actions and logging them while preserving their semantics. Next, they analyze
this data in order to discover meaningful user characteristics and lastly perform
the corresponding user model update to add the newly discovered knowledge to
the already existing knowledge in the user model. We evaluate our research in
two domains: the domain of job offers and the domain of scientific publications.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Related Work</title>
      <p>
        There are two main approaches to user activity logging - standard web server
logs and client-side logs created by special software tools deployed on a user,s
computer. Web server logs are commonly used as input for various data mining
techniques tn Web UsageMi,ni,ng[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref4">4</xref>
        ] whose results are mostly common sequential
patterns or clusters of users and pages. These techniques match the active user
scssion (or her prcviously stored profiles) to usage patterns of user groups anci
thus do not reveal individual user characteristics because of their social aspect.
      </p>
      <p>Unfortunately, web server logs do not provide enough information due to the
caching mechanisms of web browsers and basic principles of the HTTp
protocol, which is a low-level stateless protocol without clearly defined semantics of
performed actions (u.g., GET and POST do not supply adequate information).
Furthermore, a web-based adaptiue system with dynamic page generation can
produce two similar or even equal log entries which result in completely different
system responsesdue to changes in the user and domain models.</p>
      <p>
        To address some shortcomings of this approach and to capture information
about client-side only interactions (e.g., hovering on tooltips) client-side iogging
methods were proposed. lVIost are either pure ciient-side only syste-r [S] ot
standalone desktop applications communicating with a server [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">6</xref>
        ]. Standuion"
client-side applications can provide a high Ievel of detaii but may present serious
threats to user privacy. The use of standard client web technologies such as
JavaScript or Java applets [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">5</xref>
        ] appears to be more suitable due to its restricted
scope of operation and higher user acceptance though without event semantics.
      </p>
      <p>
        Several approaches to user characteristic discovery have already been
proposed' One important method of user characteristics discovery is ihe analysis
of user navigation. In [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ] authors use the information foraging theory and
propose an algorithm for inferring of user needs based on the user's traversal path
through a hypertext collection. The resulting user needs however are only
expressed as a set of keywords with no defined relations between them and no
s.emantics.In [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">10</xref>
        ] authors propose a method of user model acquisition based on
dialogue act types and instantiating of their presuppositions patterns.
      </p>
      <p>While existing server-side and client-side methods of data acquisition can
be used. they are severeiy insufficient since they fail to effectively capture the
semantics of individual events for further processing. The analysis of user
navigation and irnplicit user feedback is a promising method of user characteristics
discovery' However, most approaches focus only on the discovery of user ratings
and do not explore the reasons behind them. Here the comparison of displayed
and rated concepts by means of concept comparison methods might yield more
detailed and/or accurate user characteristics. Similarly, authors t iit use user
ratings to discover rules expressing user preferences on ordered values.
3 Method for lJser characteristics Discovery
Figure 1 shows the architectural overview of a web-based system employing the
proposed method as an integrated set of cooperating software .o*por,.rrts [t3].</p>
      <p>Personalizedpresentation
Presentation
. . . . ' . : ' . : . ' . . . . . . . .</p>
      <p>Personalization</p>
      <p>layer
User modeling
layer</p>
      <p>User
characteristic</p>
      <p>evaluation
plicatlonlogic la
Data la</p>
      <p>User CharacteristicsAcquisitionfrom Logs with Semantics 105
We combine and enhance both client-side and server-side logging approaches and
create a comprehensive 1og of user actions while also preserving the semantics
of individual actions (Figure 1, bottom right). Although server-side monitoring
is reliable, it might miss time-related data about user interaction. Thus we use
client-side logging as an optional source of time-precise information, since we
have no direct control over the execution of ciient-side logging mechanisms (no
data can be gathered if the user disables monitoring on the client side).
Client-side logging. Client-side logging captures events that occur entireiy on
the client-side (in the web browser) during user interaction with elements on
the displayed pages and also captures precise time-related data about individual
actions which might be missed by server-side logging. The monitored events
include Load, (Jnload, Cli,clc,Mouseouer and Mouseout.</p>
      <p>For each captured event, we collect the following data: type of euent, time
when it was fi.redand contert of the captured event, e.g. what link was followed.
F\rrthermore, additional events invisible to the server-side might be captured
suclr as Change, invoked when the content of a form control changes. The
sequcncc of such events indicates the order in which a user fills thc form. Another
example is the Scroll event, invoked when the user scrolls the content of a page.
Server-side logging. Standard web server logs are not suitable for the
estimation of individuai user characteristics, since they require complicated
preprocessing 11]but also lack the semantics of performed actions. We propose a method
of server-side event logging that allows for the logging of events with defined
semantics by both server-side and client-side tools and for the integration of these
events into continuous streams of events for a particular user and user session.
Nloreover, since only individual presentation/interaction tools "understand,, the
setuantics of events that they process we propose them to be responsibie for the
iogging of their own events by means of a common server-side logging tool.</p>
      <p>Consequently, server-side logging aggregates events from various sources and
stores their semantics which mostly include references to concepts from a
domain ontoiogy. To further separate log analysis from log creation we devised a
colrrmon euent ontologg that defines the semantics of individual events and their
attributes. F\rrthermore, to evaluate the reasons behind user actions we also log
thc logical display state of the user interface at the time when an event took
place. This allows us to analyze user decisions (i.e., occurred events) based on
what the user saw in the web browser interface (i.e., what her reasons were).</p>
      <p>If for instance the system was using a faceted browser for navigation in the
infbrmation space of job offers, one event could be to display details about a
spocific job offer, while another might be to show oniy job offers in New york.
For both of these events, the meaning of the action would be logged (i.e., URI
of tlie respective event) together with attributes such as the URI of New york.
Lastly, the logical display state would be logged indicating amongst others which
otlter job offers were dispiayed.when the user chose the details of a specific one.
3.2</p>
      <p>Log Analysis
The purpose of log analysis is to process the acquired user activity logs, to
identify meaningful user characteristics and to update the user model to reflect
the newly gained knowledge. We focus on two main aspects - on the eualuat,ion
of u'ser nau'igation in the available information space and on the eualuation of
i'mplici't feedback. We assume the use of a navigation model that allows the user
to tnove freeiy on a site, so her behavior can be influenced by her characteristics.
Individual steps of the log analysis method are depicted in Figure 2.
Data preprocessing. The proposed logging methods produce ,,ready-to-use,'
data that makes preprocessing much easier compared to the preprocessing
required when using standard web server logs. However, some additional
transformations can be applied such as the removal of successiveidentical actions (e.g.,
when the user repeats an action due to slow system responseJ.</p>
      <p>Pattern detection. Wc pcrforrtr the rnapping of everrtsonto a set of predefilcd
behavior patterns - sequencesof successiveevents, for which we devised a special
representation using event semantics. Each sequencemust occur a given number
of times (count-of-occurence) to satisfy a pattern and can be defined as
continuous which requires that the events are uninterrupted (i.e., the rule cannot span
multiple sessions).tr\rrthermore, sequencescan be nested and each sequence or
User CharacteristicsAcquisitionfrom Logs with Semantics 101</p>
      <p>Heuristics
Fig. 2. Overview of user characteristics acquisition. Data from presentation tools and
client-side logging (1) are stored in a database of user actions (2). After its
preprocessing (3) we try to detect occurrences of predefined patterns (4) and opbionaliy store
intermediate results (5). lve determine the user model update based on the heuristics
associated with the detected pattern (6). If a pattern represents implicit user feedback,
we evaluate it (7) and estimate user preferences by comparing the respective concepts
(8). Before the update of the user model, we evaluate user behavior consistency (g)
which influences the confidence of the reveared characteristics (10).
everrt czrn hurve a contttxt rvhich defirres firrther restrictions (e.g., which event
attribute is required to change in the next event and which attribute must remain
the same for all events and subsequences of a specific sequence).</p>
      <p>
        The pattern in the following example is satisfied when a user logs into a
system and selects at least one restriction in a faceted browser interface (u.g.,
selects Washington state). It allows the user to select more than one restriction
if their PropertyUri remains the same and restrictlonUri is different (which
means the user is refining the restriction in the current facet, e.g. selects Seattle).
This pattern focuses on "first click behavior", right after the user's iogin, since
the first click usually has higher relevance to the user,s goal [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ].
(sequence id=" s010 " iscontinuous="true r count-of -occurence=,, 1,,)
&lt;event id="ev020,' type=,rhttp: / /f.iit. sk#Userlogin',,/)
( e v e n t i d = " e v 0 2 1 t ' t y p e = ' r h t t p : / / f i i t . s k # s e l e c t R e s t r i c t i o n , ' / )
&lt; s e q u e n c e i d = " s 0 1 1 " c o u n t - o f - o c c u r e n c e = r r - 1 r r &gt;
( e v e n t i d = " e v 0 2 2 " t y p e = " h t t p : / / t i t t . s k # s e l e c t R e s t r i c t i o n " )
&lt;context type=rrhttp : / / t iit. sk#SameAsprevious ")
      </p>
      <p>&lt;attribut e s &gt;http : / / t iit. sk#propertyUri&lt;/attribut
&lt; / c o n t e x t &gt;
&lt;context type="http :/ / fiit. sk#Diff erentThanprevious")</p>
      <p>&lt;attribut e&gt;http : / / t iit. sk#restri ct ionURI&lt;/attribut e&gt;
&lt;/context&gt; &lt;/event&gt; &lt;/sequence&gt; (/sequence&gt;
Inconsistent behavior detection. lVe use the sequentialpatterns mining data
mining method, which operates on previous user sessions.We consider the
identified sequential patterns to be patterns of user behavior. The current user session
is compared against these patterns to find out whether the current user behavior
is "consistent" with the user's previous behavior patterns.</p>
      <p>
        If this is not the case, one of the following heuristics is used:
1. If the time difference between sessionsis too trigh. we assume that the user's
characteristics have changed and lower the confidence of the characteristics
stored in the model (or even reset the whole model and start over).
2. Else we assume that the user is randomly browsing a site without following
a defined goai or is acting on behalf of somebody else. We thus significantly
Iower the confidence of characteristics discovered in the current session.
Feedback evaluation. If a pattern of implicit feedback was detected [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">9</xref>
        ] then
we use feedback eualuation to determine user rating of the disptayed content.
One important source of implicit feedback is the time a user spent on viewing a
page (reading time). Usually, this time is correlated to the user's interest in the
page's content, but if it is extremely long, one can assume that the user stopped
working with the system. Longer reading time does not generally correspond to
user's real interest and therefore must be capped at some reasonable value [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref11">11</xref>
        ].
If however the information space consists of a considerable amount of concepts,
the sole selection of a concept can be interpreted as positive user feedback.
Concept comparison. Knowing the user's rating of displayed concepts is not
enough to estimate user characteristics. One must investigate the reasons why a
specific rating is low (or high) and since this rating varies on diverse concepts,
the relation between these concepts must be discovered. We compare concepts
represented as ontology class instances and determine the level of similarity by
finding their common and different aspects. For example, if two instances with
completely different ratings differ only in one attribute, we assume that the
attribute is important to user.
      </p>
      <p>
        During the comparison we examine the relationship of the compared
instances based on the used class taxonomy. We also traverse all of their attributes,
which might be either data type or object type attributes. When comparing data
type attributes, a simple comparison of strings does not give satisfactory results
as the semantic dissimilarities in compared texts need to be evaluated [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref12">12</xref>
        ]. If an
object type attribute is found, the algorithm is executed recursively on it.
user model update. The final step of log analysis is the update of an instance
of the user model, which can either be performed directly by means of heuristics
predefined in patterns or by using concept comparison results.
      </p>
      <p>User CharacteristicsAcquisitionfrom Logs with Semantics 109</p>
      <p>Each characteristic stored in the model has a level of conf,dence- how reliable
we think the estimation is, and a level of. releuance of the characteristic to a
defined goal. Heuristics define how to modify these two parameters with support
for separate update strategies for relevance and confidence and also for the use
of hard limits on the extent of applicable changes. Confidence updates are also
affected by the results of behavior consistency detection.
4</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Evaluation and Conclusion</title>
      <p>We evaluated the proposed method using the domain and user models in the
domain of job offers and in the domain of scientific publications. For this purpose
we implemented software tools to perform the respective tasks.</p>
      <p>- Cli,ck tool realizes client-side logging, It captures events fired by a web
browser during user interaction with elements on displayed pages. Since
standalone applications are inflexible and pose a privacy threat, we
implemented Cli,ck using JavaScript technology.
- Semanti.cLogtool implements server-side logging by means of a web service.</p>
      <p>It allows both presentation tools and Cti.ckto log data about user interaction,
which are then aggregated into one common 1ogper user sessionand stored
in a relational database.
- LogAnalyzer tool performs the estimation of user characteristics from the
acquired user logs. It continuously evaluates incoming events and performs user
model updates, which are used to personalize the content and presentation
of the system by means of presentation tools such as faceted browser.</p>
      <p>Our approach has several vital advantages over existing solutions. The main
improvement to logging is that the semantics of user actions and of the system
itself are acquired and preserved for further processing by user characteristics
estimation tools. These include both the relevant events of the server-side
presentation/interaction tools and the purely client-side events caused by the user.</p>
      <p>Presently, most log analysis tools need to "understand" the URL addresses
and the associated parameters of individual presentation tools in order to
"comprehend" the semantics in logs leading to tightly coupled tools. The addition of
another presentation tool thus results in a (major) update of the log analysis
tools. Our server-side logging with semantics circumvents this tight coupling of
presentation and log analysis tools by providing a common representation of
logged events from all presentation tools by means of an event ontology.
Furthermore, virtually no preprocessing is required compared to the extensive one
required to extract user and sessiondata for standard web server logs.</p>
      <p>A significant advantage of our log analysis approach is its universality. We carr
define rnore or less complicated sequencesof events with semantics typical for a
particular application domain. Our initial evaluation shows that individual
patterns depend on the used presentation method and/or navigation model and can
be successfully reused in multiple domains if the presentation method remains
the same (".g., a faceted browser). One more advantage is that each estimated
characteristic contains information both about its relevance and its reliability of
estimation. Personalization tools can take this information into account when
using the characteristics stored in the user model for successiveadaptation.</p>
      <p>Our future work wili include more comprehensive evaluation and estimation
of more complex characteristics and combinations of characteristics. Moreover,
support for (semi)automatic pattern modification and/or generation might
improve user characteristic estimation accuracy and efficiency.</p>
      <p>Th"is work was part'ially supported by th,e Slouak Research and Deuelopment
Agencg under the contract No. APVT-20-007104, the State progran'Ln7eof
research and deuelopment under the contract No. 1025/04r and the Sci,enti,ficGrant
Agency of Slouak Republi,c,grant No. VG1/3102/06.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          1.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Z.</given-names>
            <surname>Chen</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
            <surname>Fu</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and Tong F.
          <article-title>Optimal Algorithms for Finding UserAccessSessions from Very Large Web Logs</article-title>
          .
          <source>World Wide Web</source>
          ,
          <volume>6</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>259</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>279</lpage>
          ,
          <year>2003</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          2.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
            <surname>Chi</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Pirolli</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Chen</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Pitkow</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Using Information Scent to Model User Information Needsand Actions on the Web. In Human factors in computing systems</article-title>
          ,CHI '
          <volume>01</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>pages490</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>497</lpage>
          ,New York, I.{Y, USA,
          <year>2001</year>
          .ACIvI Press.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          3.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
            <surname>Church</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Keane</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            <surname>Smyth</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>The First Click is the Deepest:Assessing Information ScentPredictions for a PersonalizedSearchEngine</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Third Workshop on Empirical Eualuati,onof AdaptiueSystemsin conjunctionwith AH</source>
          <year>2004</year>
          ,
          <year>2004</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          4. IvI.Eirinaki and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Vazirgiannis</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Web mining for web personalization</article-title>
          .
          <source>ACM Trans. Inter-netTechn.,3</source>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ):
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>27</lpage>
          ,
          <year>2003</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          5.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
            <surname>Etgen</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Cantor</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>What doesgetting WET (Web Event-loggingTool) Mean for Web Usability? In Sth Conferenceon Human Factors A The I,tr/ebG,aithersburg</article-title>
          ,Maryland,USA,
          <year>1999</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          6.
          <string-name>
            <surname>K. Fenstermacherand M. Ginsburg</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Mining Client-SideActivity for Personalization</article-title>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>In</surname>
            <given-names>WECWIS</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , pages
          <fpage>205</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>212</lpage>
          ,
          <year>2002</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          7.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
            <surname>Horviith</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            <surname>Vojtri3</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Ordinal classificationwith monotonicity constraints</article-title>
          .
          <source>In Ind. Conferenceon Data Min'ing,LNCS</source>
          <volume>4065</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>pages2L7</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>225</lpage>
          .Springer,
          <year>2006</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          8.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
            <surname>Lu</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Q.</given-names>
            <surname>Luo</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
            <surname>Shun</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Extending a Web Browserwith Client-SideMining</article-title>
          . In X. Zhou,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
            <surname>Zhang</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,and M. Orlowska,editors,
          <source>Web Technologieasnd Applications</source>
          ,
          <source>APWeb</source>
          <year>2003</year>
          , LNCS
          <volume>2642</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>pages166</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>177</lpage>
          .Springer,
          <year>2003</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          9.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
            <surname>Oard</surname>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            <surname>Kim</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <article-title>Implicit Feedbackfor RecommenderSystems</article-title>
          .
          <source>In AAAI Workshopon RecommenderSystems</source>
          ,
          <year>July 1998</year>
          .,
          <year>1998</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          10.
          <string-name>
            <given-names>W.</given-names>
            <surname>Pohl</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>A</given-names>
            <surname>Kobsa</surname>
          </string-name>
          , and
          <string-name>
            <given-names>O.</given-names>
            <surname>Kutter</surname>
          </string-name>
          .
          <source>User Model Acquisition Heuristics Based on Dialogue Acts. In Intemtational Workshopon the Desi,gnof CooperatiueSystems</source>
          ,
          <fpage>pages477</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>486</lpage>
          ,
          <article-title>Antibes-Juan-les-</article-title>
          <string-name>
            <surname>PinsF</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,rance,
          <year>1995</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref11">
        <mixed-citation>
          11. R.. R.a,ftcratrclB. Srnyth.
          <article-title>PzussiveProfiling frour Server Logs in arr Online R.ccruitment Environment</article-title>
          .
          <source>In IJCAI Workshop on Intelligent Techniquesfor Web Personalisation(ITWP</source>
          <year>2001</year>
          ),
          <fpage>pages35</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>41</lpage>
          , Seattle,Washington,USA,
          <year>2001</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref12">
        <mixed-citation>
          12. IvI. Tury and
          <string-name>
            <surname>M.</surname>
          </string-name>
          <year>Bielikov6</year>
          .
          <article-title>An Approach to Detection Ontology Changes</article-title>
          .
          <source>In 1st Int. Workshop on Adaptation and Euolution in Web Systems Engineering</source>
          , AEWSEO,
          <string-name>
            <surname>At</surname>
            <given-names>ICWE</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , PAIOAIIO, CA, USA,
          <year>2006</year>
          .ACM.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref13">
        <mixed-citation>
          13.
          <string-name>
            <surname>M. TvaroZek</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,M. Barla, anciM. Bielikovii. PcrsorralizedPreserrt:r,tioin Web-Ba^
          <article-title>sed Information Systems</article-title>
          . In van Leeuwen,
          <string-name>
            <surname>J.</surname>
          </string-name>
          et al., editor, SOFSEM,
          <volume>77</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>pagesTg6</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>807</lpage>
          .Springer,LNCS
          <volume>4362</volume>
          ,
          <year>2007</year>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>