Journal on Multimodal User Interfaces

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 217–229 | Cite as

Context-sensitive, cross-platform user interface generation

  • Miroslav Macik
  • Tomas Cerny
  • Pavel Slavik
Original Paper


User interfaces (UI) of software applications play a crucial part in communication with users. Attractive UIs often lead to market success, and thus there is a significant incentive to provide users with malleable UIs that can adapt as much as possible to their needs. However, such UIs require significant development and maintenance efforts. In this paper, we describe a context model based on ability-based design that is well suited to the purposes of automated UI generation. We then introduce a platform that delivers adaptive UIs across various platforms. We use runtime combinatoric optimisation to support usability and to generate context-sensitive UIs. Since the development and maintenance of such UIs can be complex, our platform integrates a module for code-inspection for data-oriented applications to reduce these efforts. It also utilises a visual editor to simplify manual UI design.


Human-computer interaction Context-model UI generation Ability-based design 



This research has been supported by Technology Agency of the Czech Republic, funded by grant no. TA01010784 (Form Cloud) and research program TE01020415 (V3C - Visual Computing Competence Center) and by Czech Technical University by grant no. SGS13/213/OHK3/3T/13 (FIS 161 – 832130C000).


  1. 1.
    Cbs inc. study (2013) Number of smartphone users tops 1 billion.
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Baranyi P, Csapo A (2010) Cognitive infocommunications: Coginfocom. In: Computational intelligence and informatics (CINTI), 2010 11th International Symposium on, IEEE, pp 141–146Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bernard E (2009) JSR 303: bean validation.
  5. 5.
    Berti S, Correani F, Mori G, Paternò F, Santoro C (2004)Teresa: a transformation-based environment for designing and developing multi-device interfaces. In: CHI’04 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, ACM, pp 793–794Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Biswas R, Ort E (2006) The java persistence api-a simpler programming model for entity persistence. Sun Microsystems Inc, MayGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Blumendorf M, Lehmann G, Albayrak S (2010) Bridging models and systems at runtime to build adaptive user interfaces. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGCHI symposium on Engineering interactive computing systems, ACM, New York, pp 9–18.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bryant J, Jones M (2012) Responsive web design. In: Pro HTML5 Performance, pp 37–49. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Calvary G, Coutaz J, Thevenin D, Limbourg Q, Bouillon L, Vanderdonckt J (2003) A unifying reference framework for multi-target user interfaces. Interact Comput 15(3):289–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cerny T, Chalupa V, Donahoo MJ (2012) Towards smart user interface design. In: Info. Science and Applications (ICISA), 2012 International Conference on. IEEE , pp 1–6Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cerny T, Donahoo MJ, Song E (2013) Towards effective adaptive user interfaces design. In: Proceedings of the 2013 research in applied computation symposium (RACS 2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cerny T, Song E (2011) Uml-based enhanced rich form generation. In: Proceedings of the 2011 ACM symposium on research in applied computation. ACM, New York, pp 192–199Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cerny T, Song E (2012) Model-driven rich form generation. INFORMATION: Int Inf Inst 15(7): 2695–2714Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Clerckx T, Luyten K, Coninx K (2004) The mapping problem back and forth: customizing dynamic models while preserving consistency. In: Proceedings of the 3rd annual confernce on task models and diagrams. ACM, New York, pp 33–42Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Conrad J, Viescas J (2010) Microsoft\(^{\textregistered }\) Access\(^{\textregistered }\) 2010 Inside Out. O’Reilly Media, Inc., USAGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Czarnecki K, Eisenecker UW (1999) Components and generative programming (invited paper). In: Proceedings of the 7th European software engineering conference, ESEC/FSE-7. Springer, London, pp 2–19Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    DeMichiel L (2009) JSR 317: JavaTM persistence API, version 2.0.
  18. 18.
    Forman IR, Forman N (2004) Java reflection in action (In Action series). Manning Publications Co., GreenwichGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gajos K, Weld D, Wobbrock J (2010) Automatically generating personalized user interfaces with supple. Artif Intell 174(12–13):910–950CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Graziano AM, Raulin ML (2003) Research methods: a process of inquiry. HarperCollins College Publishers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kennard R, Leaney J (2010) Towards a general purpose architecture for ui generation. J Syst Softw 83(10):1896–1906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Laddad R (2003) AspectJ in action: practical aspect-oriented programming, vol 512. Manning Greenwich,GreenwichGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Limbourg Q, Vanderdonckt J, Michotte B, Bouillon L, López-Jaquero V (2005) USIXML: a language supporting multi-path development of user interfaces engineering human computer Interaction and interactive systems, chap 12. Springer, Berlin, pp 134–135. doi: 10.1007/11431879_12
  24. 24.
    López-Jaquero V, Montero F, Real F (2009) Designing user interface adaptation rules with t: Xml. In: Proceedings of the 14th international conference on intelligent user interfaces. ACM, New York, pp 383–388Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Luyten K, Vandervelpen C, den Bergh JV, Coninx K (2005) Context-sensitive user interfaces for ambient environments: design, development and deployment. In: Davies N, Kirste T, Schumann H (eds) Mobile computing and ambient intelligence: the challenge of multimedia. Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings. Internationales Begegnungs- und Forschungszentrum für Informatik (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany.
  26. 26.
    Macik, M.: Context model for ability-based automatic ui generation. In: Cognitive infocommunications (CogInfoCom), 2012 IEEE 3rd International Conference on. IEEE, pp 727–732Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Macik M, Cerny T, Basek J, Slavik P (2013) Platform-aware rich-form generation for adaptive systems through code-inspection. In: Human factors in computing and informatics. Springer, Berlin, pp 768–784Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Maly I, Mikovec Z (2010) Web applications usability testing with task model skeletons. In: Human-centred software engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 158–165Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mernik M, Heering J, Sloane AM (2005) When and how to develop domain-specific languages. ACM Comput Surv 37(4):316–344. doi: 10.1145/1118890.1118892 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Morin B, Barais O, Jezequel JM, Fleurey F, Solberg A (2009) Models@ run.time to support dynamic adaptation. Computer 42(10):44–51. doi: 10.1109/MC.2009.327 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nielsen J (1993) Usability engineering. AP Professional, Boston. ISBN 0-12-518406-9Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    O’Neil EJ (2008) Object/relational mapping 2008: hibernate and the entity data model (edm). In: Proceedings of the 2008 ACM SIGMOD international conference on management of data. ACM, New York, pp 1351–1356Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Perez-medina Jl, Dupuy-chessa S, Front A (2007) A survey of model driven engineering tools for user interface design. In: Proceedings of 6th international workshop on task models and diagrams (TAMODIA’2007). Springer, Berlin, pp 84–97Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Persa G, Csapó ÁB, Baranyi P (2012) Coginfocom systems from an interaction perspective—a pilot application for etocom-. JACIII 16(2):297–304Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Salah S, Sug H (2011) The effectiveness of rapid business application development using oracle forms. In: Advanced information management and service (ICIPM), 2011 7th international conference on. IEEE, pp 33–37Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Slovacek V (2010) Methods for efficient development of task-based applications. In: Human-centred software engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 206–213Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Sottet JS, Calvary G, Coutaz J, Favre JM (2008) A model-driven engineering approach for the usability of plastic user interfaces. In: Engineering interactive systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 140–157 Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sottet JS, Calvary G, Favre JM (2006) Models at runtime for sustaining user interface plasticity. In: Models@ run. time workshop (in conjunction with MoDELS/UML 2006 conf.)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Stephanidis C, Paramythis A, Akoumianakis D, Sfyrakis M (1998) Self-adapting web-based systems: towards universal accessibility. In: 4th workshop on user interface for all. Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Van Dam A (1997) Post-wimp user interfaces. Commun ACM 40(2):63–67CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wobbrock J, Kane S, Gajos K, Harada S, Froehlich J (2011) Ability-based design: concept, principles and examples. ACM Trans Access Comput (TACCESS) 3(3):9Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Yeoh W, Felner A, Koenig S (2008) Bnb-adopt: an asynchronous branch-and-bound dcop algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 7th international joint conference on autonomous agents and multiagent systems, vol 2. Int. Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp 591–598Google Scholar

Copyright information

© OpenInterface Association 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Graphics and Interaction, Faculty of Electrical EngineeringCzech Technical University in PraguePraha 2Czech Republic
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Electrical EngineeringCzech Technical University in PraguePraha 2Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations