Creating Occupant-Centered Digital Twins Using the Occupant Feedback Ontology Implemented in a Smartwatch App

Tracking #: 3254-4468

Alex Donkers
Bauke de Vries
Dujuan Yang

Responsible editor: 
Guest Editors SW for Industrial Engineering 2022

Submission type: 
Full Paper
Occupant feedback enables building managers to improve occupants’ health, comfort, and satisfaction. However, acquiring continuous occupant feedback and integrating this feedback with other building information is challenging. This paper presents a scalable method to acquire continuous occupant feedback and directly integrate this with other building information. Semantic web technologies were applied to solve data interoperability issues. The Occupant Feedback Ontology was developed to describe feedback semantically. Next to this, a smartwatch app – Mintal – was developed to acquire continuous feedback on indoor environmental quality. The app gathers location, medical information, and answers on short micro surveys. Mintal applied the Occupant Feedback Ontology to directly integrate the feedback with linked building data. A case study was performed to evaluate this method. A semantic digital twin was created by integrating linked building data, sensor data, and occupant feedback. Results from SPARQL queries gave more insight into an occupant's perceived comfort levels in the Open Flat. The case study shows how integrating feedback with building information allows for more occupant-centric decision support tools. The approach presented in this paper can be used in a wide range of use cases, both within and without the architecture, building, and construction domain.
Full PDF Version: 


Solicited Reviews:
Click to Expand/Collapse
Review #1
By Maxime Lefrançois submitted on 15/Sep/2022
Review Comment:

It would have been easier to review this paper if the authors provided in the supplementary archive a version of the paper that includes revision marks to ease the comparison with the previous version.

From what I can tell with a simple screening, the only change is the addition of Table 1, with a sentence that refers to it.

Table 1 improves the reading of Section 2.3 greatly. It could have been more reader-friendly to include a column with a human-readable label (for example: [46] = SOSA, [74] = BOT)

I acknowledge the rationale for not adding the alignments to Section 4.3, but instead documenting the alignments in the HTML documentation of the ontology.

I can clearly now recommend to accept this new version.

Please check that the URLs dereference. For example [1] --> 404