CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 43Usability and User Interface DesignInnovative Human-Technology InteractionIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning

Intelligent User Interfaces and Their Evaluation: A Systematic Mapping Study

Open access
Brdnik, Saša, Heričko, Tjaša, Šumak, Boštjan·2022·Sensors
DOI 10.3390/s22155830PMC PMC9370954
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Intelligent user interfaces (IUI) are driven by the goal of improvement in human–computer interaction (HCI), mainly improving user interfaces’ user experience (UX) or usability with the help of artificial intelligence. The main goal of this study is to find, assess, and synthesize existing state-of-the-art work in the field of IUI with an additional focus on the evaluation of IUI. This study analyzed 211 studies published in the field between 2012 and 2022. Studies are most frequently tied to HCI and SE domains. Definitions of IUI were observed, showing that adaptation, representation, and intelligence are key characteristics associated with IUIs, whereas adaptation, reasoning, and representation are the most commonly used verbs in their description. Evaluation of IUI is mainly conducted with experiments and questionnaires, though usability and UX are not considered together in evaluations. Most evaluations (81% of studies) reported partial or complete improvement in usability or UX. A shortage of evaluation tools, methods, and metrics, tailored for IUI, is noticed. Most often, empirical data collection methods and data sources in IUI evaluation studies are experiment, prototype development, and questionnaire.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/s22155830

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a systematic mapping review of Intelligent User Interfaces and AUI from 2012 to 2022, 212 studies were identified, among which only ten corresponded to frameworks and four to methodologies.

    “In a systematic mapping review on the topic of Intelligent User Interfaces and AUI from 2012 to 2022 (Brdnik et al. 2022), the research identified 212 studies, among these only ten corresponded to frameworks and four to methodologies (Table 2).”

    From AdaptUI: A Framework for the development of Adaptive User Interfaces in Smart Product-Service Systems (2024) · cites this paper as Brdnik et al. 2022

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 1 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • There is no unified software architecture or framework to support lifecycle development of AUI.

    “Another challenge to adaptation is that there is no unified software architecture or framework to support lifecycle development of AUI.”

    From AdaptUI: A Framework for the development of Adaptive User Interfaces in Smart Product-Service Systems (2024) · cites this paper as Brdnik et al. 2022

    Section 4.2 (Research Space; page unavailable) reports frameworks among the IUI solutions studied and describes their engineering phases, but does not say whether a unified architecture or framework supports AUI development across its lifecycle. Section 5.1 discusses gaps in evaluation methods, not lifecycle development. Searches for a unified architecture, framework, and development lifecycle found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The absence of software architectures or frameworks for AUI development is a significant challenge.

    “The absence of software architectures or frameworks for AUI development is a significant challenge, as revealed in a recent studies emphasizing the need for frameworks and methodologies (Brdnik et al. 2022).”

    From AdaptUI: A Framework for the development of Adaptive User Interfaces in Smart Product-Service Systems (2024) · cites this paper as Brdnik et al. 2022

    The Discussion (§5.1) and Conclusions (§6) identify a lack of standardized evaluation methods and guidelines for intelligent user interfaces, not an absence of software architectures or development frameworks for adaptive user interfaces (AUIs). The Limitations (§5.3) explicitly say the study’s findings are not directly transferable to AUIs. Searches for architectures, frameworks, and development methodologies found no passage establishing the claimed AUI development challenge; page numbers were unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Brdnik, S., Heričko, T., & Šumak, B.
Affiliations
University of Maribor (SI)
Corresponding author
Brdnik, Saša
ORCID
Venue
Sensors
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2022-08-04
Volume
22
Issue
15
Pages
5830
ISSN
1424-8220 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/s22155830
PMC
PMC9370954
OpenAlex
W4289860838
Cited by
43
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 23 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 1
FWCI
2.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Sensors (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Maribor digital library (University of Maribor) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Javna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RS (P2-0057)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Keywords
intelligent user interfaces, user interface evaluation, usability, user experience, adaptive user interfaces, evaluation metrics, assessment methods
MeSH terms
Artificial Intelligence, Computers, Humans, Intelligence, Surveys and Questionnaires, User-Computer Interface

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review