You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Heritage
Download PDF
  • Systematic Review
  • Open Access

28 January 2023

A Survey on Computational and Emergent Digital Storytelling

,
and
Department of Cultural Technology and Communication, University of the Aegean, 81100 Mitilini, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
Current address: Department of Cultural Technology and Communication, University Hill, 81132 Mytilene, Greece.
Heritage2023, 6(2), 1227-1263;https://doi.org/10.3390/heritage6020068
This article belongs to the Special Issue Immersive Virtual Reality for Heritage and Museums
Version Notes
Order Reprints
Review Reports

Abstract

The research field of digital storytelling is cross-disciplinary and extremely wide. In this paper, methods, frameworks, and tools that have been created for authoring and presenting digital narratives, are selected and examined among hundreds of works. The basic criterion for selecting these works has been their ability to create content by computational, emergent methods. By delving into the work of many researchers, the objective is to study current trends in this research field and discuss possible future directions. Most of the relevant tools and methods have been designed with a specific purpose in mind, but their use could be expanded to other areas of interest or could at least be the steppingstone for other ideas. Therefore, the following works show elements of computational and emergent narrative creation and a classification is proposed according to their purpose of existence. Finally, new potential research directions in the field are identified and possible future research steps are discussed.

1. Introduction

Humans have always liked sharing stories. It is the most fundamental way we learn, encouraging both personal reflection and public discussion [1]. Storytelling is a widely used method for people across the world to engage emotionally, communicate, and project cultural elements and personalities. In addition, stories connect us with previous experiences and build bridges between the past and the present [2]. Narratologists agree that to constitute a narrative, a text must tell a story, exist in a world, be situated in time, include intelligent agents and have some form of a causal chain of events, while it also usually seeks to convey something meaningful to an audience [3]. Apart from humans, museums can be considered as “natural storytellers” [1]. Museums aim at making their exhibits appealing and engaging to an increasing variety of audiences, while also nurturing their role in conservation, interpretation, education and outreach [2]. Documentaries, films, video games, TV news, literature, theater, music and all kinds of art are ways of telling stories; true, fictional, or anything in-between. Even a board game, a religious ceremony, a sports event, or a dinner can be thought of as a storytelling procedure. Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish a narrative; instead it is easier to search in what ways any procedure can be considered as such. Narratives are often confused with stories and are erroneously considered to be synonyms. In this work, both are used interchangeably, even though their conceptual differences are well-known. In order to illustrate their difference, we can, for example, claim that the story of the modern Olympic Games is one, but there are countless narratives about the Olympic Games, expressing personal experiences and beliefs, for different periods and various games, happening around the globe. Some narratives may be famous already; others remain unknown and reach the listeners either from people who experienced them or from third parties. Narratives always contain personal aspects; according to Hills [4], a narrative is not merely a series of events, but a personification of events through a medium such as language. Thus, as storytelling connects us with deeper emotions and experiences, it builds bridges connecting the past and present [2], becoming an extremely powerful medium for communicating messages and ideas.
In the digital era, storytelling derives its engaging power by integrating images, music, narratives, and voice, thereby giving a deeper dimension and vivid color to characters, situations, experiences, and insights [5]. Computers have been involved in the creation, storage, reproduction, sharing, and publication of stories. Initially, they were just side tools, but advanced and complex algorithms over a constantly and exponentially growing processing power brought them closer to the generative procedure of story-making. Stories also became interactive; listeners could intervene in their flow and decide, to some extent, how they would unfold. This is how the term of the narrative paradox came up; the freedom of choice in the formation of the story, as opposed to its prefabricated plot by the author. The user interaction with the medium conflicts with the narrative design [6]. Thus, there is always a tension between the story and freedom [7] and a balance has to be established to preserve the internal consistency of the story. Rules and boundaries are necessary to maintain the story trajectory and end up communicating messages that are desirable—as originally defined by the author—and not unpleasant.
Narratives can be linear following a specific trajectory or interactive (branching), which means they can follow several paths and the user has some level of control over the story outcome. Computers can participate in the creation of these narratives, in different ways and to varying degrees. Each story needs characters, space and a plot; algorithms may be involved in any of the precedent elements. Research in interactive narratives (IN) offers, in general, two approaches for the creation of narrative content [8]; the bottom-up approach, where the story is emergent and created as a result of user interaction with a system, and the top-down approach, where a drama manager is employed (in later papers referred to as an experience manager—EM—as stories are not always dramas) and which means that a set of rules and conditions are predefined during story creation, so that the story does not exceed certain limits. In the former case, there is huge freedom in story creation and an infinite number of paths can occur, but on the other hand, the potential of an unpleasant, unsatisfying story is high. In the latter case, when a user or system deviates from the desired trajectory of a story (as again originally intended by the author), the role of EM is to apply a mediation strategy called accommodation to transition the user to a new desirable trajectory. According to Ryan [9], the concept of possible worlds (PW) describes the spheres of a fictional system of reality and calls for an inquiry into the nature of possibility. Or, in simpler words, PWs are the possible “shapes” a fictional story can take.
A narrative act is an abstract, complex action in a narrative engine [10], usually described as a verb such as promise, award, help, inform, and so forth. These acts contribute to the narrative sequence, show potential and can take a central role when they are used as building blocks in combinatorial generative systems. An extensive catalog of more than 200 narrative acts has been created. In addition, a general three-level taxonomy is proposed, associated with an interactive visualization tool available online, allowing researchers and creative authors to consult and expand the catalog. Agency (a term mostly used in games), is the actual level of control that players feel while in the game world [3,11]. The more the agency increases, the more a user feels more engaged in the formation of the story and experiences it as a real event. On the other hand, the elevation of agency enhances the narrative paradox. Multiplayer interactive narrative experiences (MINEs) are interactive authored narratives in which multiple players experience distinct narratives (multiplayer differentiability) and their actions influence the storylines of both themselves and others (inter-player agency) [12].
More focused on cultural heritage, the utilization of multimodal storytelling mechanisms, in which digital information is presented through multiple communication methods/ media (multimedia) is considered as a supplement to physical—traditional heritage preservation, activating users’ involvement—collaboration in integrated digital environments [13]. Thus, digital storytelling is one of the resources museums have in hand for enriching their contribution to visitors and to society at large. Through narratives, museums can find new ways to enhance and represent their exhibits’ stories to visitors, attracting their attention and increasing their interest through active engagement. Technologies such as augmented reality (AR) can influence the way museums can present their narratives and display their cultural heritage information to their visitors. AR can be seen as a form of mediation using interaction and customization that supports a form of narrative where visitors can engage or even create narrative scenarios in their cultural tour. There is an older review on narrative generation systems by Young et al. [14]. Additionally, an important attempt to categorize all DS authoring tools (IDN) was presented by Shibolet et al. [15]. Another taxonomy of authoring tools was contributed by Green et al. [16], where authors observe and discuss their experience from using these tools and also present Novella [17], their proprietary authoring tool. Selecting an authoring tool is directly associated with the result of a story. According to Kitromili et al. [18], many tools are bespoke; authors explore the world of authoring tools and try to figure out how each tool shapes a different type of story. To achieve that, they create the same story using different tools and report on the differences found between stories. These differences may not be that obvious when working on one platform only.
Mu [19] attempted a survey on the storytelling of an interactive documentary and a new theory model about the subject. A classic and important contribution to the narrative theory is the book of Marie-Laure Ryan [9]. In the extensive survey of Kybartas et al. [20], the authors presented techniques and tools used in the narrative generation and created a taxonomy for these projects, where algorithms generate parts of the plot, parts of the space, define characters, and offer templates for creators to speed up the creation processes, at a higher or lower level. Nevertheless, they conclude that computers will not be able to and should not substitute humans in the story creation process. As mentioned by Kasunic et al. [21], artificial intelligence (AI) work in storytelling can be categorized in three classes: (i) Teaching AI to generate and understand stories [22]; (ii) Helping human storytellers as a co-creator [23]; and (iii) Modeling story elements. As technology advances, research attention shifts to using AI to generate stories. Smart agents, text bots, advanced text-to-speech algorithms, and dialogue systems are just some of the AI products that show that tendency. Progress in natural language processing, generative art, language generation and deep learning (which is crucial to learn from the thousands of stories and tales produced by humanity at large), are some of the research trends that elevate the role of computers in the story creation procedure.
Thus, the research field of AI use in storytelling is still open, intriguing, challenging, and attractive for many researchers all over the world. It also carries a great ethical dilemma; is it right for computers to create our stories or should this remain a purely human quality? Humans can really benefit from their own stories and after all these years, we still learn and improve on telling stories [21]. On the other hand, stories coming from AI systems could potentially introduce bias, stereotypes, and prejudice about race, gender, color, nationality and religion.
Riedl [24] introduced the term of narrative intelligence as “the ability to craft, tell, understand and respond affectively to stories”. In his positional paper, he also refers to the term of machine enculturation which, in essence, is the way we—as humans—can transfer our culture(s) into a computer. Not an easy task, not even an easy concept to fully understand and digest. Nevertheless, this is an essential step in the procedure of computational narrative; otherwise stories with annoying, offensive, disrupting or no meaning at all may arise. Thus, in this paper, some concerns are raised to the creation of narratives by AI. In another work of Riedl and Harrison [25], the authors described “preliminary work on using stories to generate a value-aligned reward signal for reinforcement learning agents that prevents psychotic-appearing behaviors”. In other words, they argue about machines that are able to learn values, by reading stories. They refer to the term of value alignment as a property of an intelligent agent that can only pursue goals beneficial to humans. Stories reflect the culture of the society in which they were produced. In this respect, an important question is whether it is possible for machines to be taught human values, using existing stories, This is important because, ideally, a general artificial intelligence system with the capability of creating stories would be desirable, but a system, especially one that is embodied, that shows deviating behaviors that can potentially harm humans would be undesirable. The problem of value learning has preoccupied researchers in the past, such as Soares and Fallenstein [26].
Figure 1 displays the evolution in computer use for storytelling. The circles represent four distinctive but overlapping storytelling periods. The further we go to the right, the more human writing tasks are assigned to algorithms. More capabilities, options, and flexibility are added to the story paths, but the role of the writers diminishes. Of course, we can always look back, since the use of technology has never been mandatory, as narrative creation characterizes humans and algorithms are not made to substitute them.
Figure 1. Evolution in computer use for digital storytelling.
Nevertheless, the current survey focuses on the research and collection of scientific works related to computational, emergent, interactive digital storytelling tools and methods. Hundreds of DS works have been collected and filtered according to their interactivity and potential for computational content creation. It is an attempt to bridge the gap between surveys published in the past by the authors mentioned above and the current state-of-the-art, in an effort to create an updated and useful survey for researchers in the field. In this respect, a taxonomy is proposed for contemporary DS works, according to their purpose and scope. Therefore, works published before 2015 have not been considered in this survey.
The works presented in this survey have been primarily retrieved from conferences related to emergent, computational, and interactive digital storytelling (Table 1). When an implementation was available, it was tested as well. Then the initial pool of works was expanded by considering their bibliographic references pertaining to the criteria discussed above (that is, published after 2015 and related to DS). Then, the final set of works was determined after expanding our search to scholarly databases such as Google Scholar and Semantic Scholar using the “emergent”, “computational”, “interactive” and “storytelling” search terms.
Table 1. Conferences related to computational DS.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section 2 overviews related work in computational and interactive DS applications, where works are presented and then classified. Section 3 categorizes works based on the employed media and interaction. A discussion and criticism on the subject follows in Section 4 and the current survey is concluded in Section 5.

4. Discussion

General thoughts: As discussed above, the research field of interactive and computational DS is broad and expanding in several directions. The reason for that is the acceptance of DS as a method, because of the simplicity in its base, the ease of use and understanding, and the fact that, in the end, narrating a story is a simple natural human activity. We tell our stories from the period we start to talk. In addition, humans evolve in storytelling as they get older. We obtain an education, we socialize, we have to deal with everyday demands, and storytelling is interwoven into our life, appearing almost everywhere; at work, in family life, in social life, in education, in entertainment, in relationships, and so forth. As we advanced in the digital era, narratives also took digital forms and started traveling the globe at high speeds. News can travel all over the world almost instantly, films have their “global premiere” across continents (at least before the COVID-19 era), video games are massively sold through web stores, and TV shows are broadcasted through international online TV services and platforms. Literature and books, in general, took a digital form “for the well-being of the environment”, and as a result of all the above, newer generations are being exposed to more narratives than ever before. Young people are “tuned” globally through social media and societies are slowly shifting to a cultural equilibrium where everybody’s personal story can potentially have a global audience and acceptance.
The findings, after analyzing all the aforementioned works, are that the field is active and attracts many researchers, who come from different domains. They create applications and tools able to speed up the writing of new narratives but also manage to enrich these narratives with multiple media, giving them new dimensions. The areas of application of these narratives can be museums and cultural sites, schools, health and entertainment venues, video games, and so forth. Many research projects do not progress to any implementation but provide ideas, reflections, and thoughts for future projects. They result in theoretical frameworks and system designs that can form the basis for a subsequent project. Other projects result in portable applications, capable of creating or managing narratives to serve a specific purpose. Some of the apps that have been built are actually authoring tools that can be used to develop narratives with speed and relevance to a topic. These narratives generally obey rules to serve the purpose for which they are written, without deviating in terms of the impact they can have; they are free from prejudice, discrimination, and offensive or disturbing content. Some other implementations try to avoid the trend of the last decade and stay out of the screen of mobile devices. They result in tangible objects that the user can interact with in order to create a narrative. Selections are made by pressing buttons, pulling levers, dragging faders, flipping switches, turning knobs, gesturing in the air, and speaking. They require the physical participation of the user and the activation of the senses of touch and hearing. Some tangible implementations are autonomous robotic mechanisms that can move, respond to their user’s choices, and create narratives (usually in audio form), giving the feeling of communicating with an intelligent being. These implementations have been used in medical applications, to rehabilitate patients as well as provide care to the elderly. They have also been used in museums around the world. A typical example is the robot Pepper from Softbank Robotics, which is used to welcome people and provide information, in the Smithsonian museum. AR and VR technologies are widely used in storytelling. Despite their disadvantages, such as their cost and consequently low availability to the general public, their bulk, and weight, as well as the nausea they can cause to the user, they remain the most powerful means of user engagement, participation, and immersion in the world of the narrative. They offer a very powerful user experience and therefore cannot be ignored by the creators.
Future trends: In university education, it is expected that programs for the design of interactive narratives are going to appear. In fact, these programs are likely to be found in departments of theoretical as well as technological studies. In school education, technologies associated with storytelling will make it very easy to create interactive narratives in the classroom, even by elementary students.
Social robots will be used more and more. Whether in hospital care or caring for the elderly and disabled at home, they offer valuable companionship and communication. The evolution of speech and conversational algorithms will increase their usability, and ultimately, their demand.
It is expected that narratives created by computational methods, and more specifically by AI systems such as GPT3 [119], will start to be used more and more in everyday applications, such as writing letters and simple emails, professional text, websites, and so forth. However, what is of more interest to the present research is the ability of these systems to produce text in more complex ways, for example in cultural heritage applications to make descriptions of artworks, museum tours, recommendations for sightseeing routes, and so forth. Museums already use storytelling systems that include audio, video, VR and AR, robotic systems, and so forth. Until now, however, all narrations are pre-recorded and pre-planned, specific for each point and exhibit. What will be more interesting to see are emergent storytelling systems, where every tour, description, and recommendation are created instantly, and personalized for each visitor.
The gaming industry has always led technological developments due to its very large appeal to the public. Games are becoming more and more complex in terms of their plot and are converging towards cinema, where complete scenarios are required, with a plot that can deviate according to the user’s choices. This has never been easy to implement, but the emergent storytelling methods make it much easier to develop more interesting games, tailored to the player’s reactions and character. The same also holds true for the film industry, but even more impressively for live theater performances, where the scenario to be followed is created in real-time, due to the audience reactions in certain ways. Documentaries and news stories are not expected to remain unaffected by all these developments, as any other human activity related to the creation and presentation of text and narratives. ChatGPT has been accepted by the public with enthusiasm and companies are investing huge amounts in the further development of tools that will lead us to a new era of searching for knowledge on the Web.
The AI factor: Creating narratives with computational methods can be seen either as a natural evolution or as an abnormal situation in which we are losing a skill that is purely human. AI can be scary in all its forms and uses, as human activities are being replaced eventually by smart systems and algorithms, but this kind of fear follows our being since the 19th-century industrial revolution. What happened then is that many people lost their jobs as they had been replaced by machines and entire societies had to transform and adapt to new conditions. Tools and methods presented in this paper try to assist and not replace people in the creative process of storytelling. They can be used as tools for organizing fast and massively producing, distributing, enhancing and enriching stories, in a way that is beneficial for all audiences and every kind of use. The questions that follow the analysis of the above works is whether the time will finally arrive when human intervention will not be needed to create narratives and whether we really want that. The GPT system as well as other AI systems in development can create texts and narratives with increasing, to a frightening point, ease and fidelity. The boundaries between human and artificial creativity begin to blur. However, we must not forget that these systems are self-trained through the data they are fed, which might (the data) not always be accurate or complete. They may contain misinterpretations, incorrect conclusions, and ambiguities. So when we have scientific applications where we need to be precise, we certainly cannot trust such a system to build our narratives. In other words, for example, we cannot yet trust a system to be our personal guide in the archaeological Acropolis museum and answer all our questions regarding the exhibits, without falling into errors and contradictions. Furthermore, narratives always contain local cultural elements, as well as personal opinions and perceptions. In order for a system to be able to reliably create a narrative, it must have cultural knowledge and experiences transferred to it (machine enculturation) and, on the other hand, it must have formed its own personal opinions; that is, it must have its own personality.
The technologies that have been developed do not yet allow us to create fully automated narratives and that is probably not the point. They help us in terms of productivity, speed, enrichment, distribution, and availability, but they require human involvement and intervention. To build on the previous example, it is not possible, and perhaps not even desirable, to have an automated tour guide in a museum that knows every detail of the exhibits and can answer every question accurately. However, we can have tools that can make that visit to the museum much more interesting. Especially for the “difficult” ages of children and teenagers, these tools add elements of gamification and simplify the educational process.
Interaction with the narratives and UX: Summarizing Table 4 and in relation to user experience, it appears that all projects that have some kind of implementation can be divided into two broad categories; those that rely exclusively on the existence of a screen (computer, mobile device, VR or AR goggles) and those that either avoid the use of a screen (altogether, or use it in a limited way and in combination with another object). Projects in the former category far outnumber those in the latter. Another general observation is that audio is, in principle, an under-represented medium, despite its well-known importance in storytelling. Creators focus on the methodology for creating stories, their feasibility, distribution methods, modes and degree of interaction, and user interface design, but in the end, it is all too common to put aside issues related to quality, direction, type (binaural vs stereo), ways of integration, and the technical means for audio. In any case, creators try to make the most of all available technologies, old and new, to create the richest and most engaging user experience possible.
Where do these works come from: For those projects of Table 4 that included some form of implementation, an attempt was also made to locate them geographically, that is, to find in which countries and places they were implemented and utilized. This is a type of information that is not always available and so with all due caution, we note the following; of the 30 projects in Table 4, 12 are from the Americas (USA and Canada), 11 are from Europe (from 9 different countries), 7 are from Asia (China, Korea, India, and Japan), and 1 is from Oceania (Australia). Almost all projects have been implemented and tested in universities and research centers. A couple of them have also been tested in schools, with students [93,94]. Those research centers were all pinned on a map as a visual representation 5. The Emotive project [125] has been implemented in the Hunterian Museum in Glasgow and in the Ancient Agora in Athens, while the CHESS project [124] has been tested in the Acropolis Museum in Athens, with hundreds of visitors from all over the world. Social robots [133] were used in hospitals. Vim [65] was placed on a public road in Brisbane Australia, to be tested by bystanders. Being there [6] was tested by 35 people in Edinburgh UK, while Psomadaki et al. [13] performed their tests with 328 people in Thessaloniki, Greece. Some works such as Villanelle [45] and Fadolah [74] were placed online to be tested and reviewed by the public. fanSHEN [112] has been performed for 10 years in theaters in the UK. In conclusion, the examined projects span four continents and have been tested by countless people in a variety of ways.

5. Conclusions and Future Work

Numerous projects are aiming at designing and creating software and hardware tools that assist in the creation of stories. These tools use algorithms for automating procedures, such as the creation of characters, environment and a plot, or can just provide an environment with templates for the faster creation of stories. The stories created are suitable for specific uses, or they could be general-purpose stories that could fit in more applications. In this survey, we have set a taxonomy of works, according to their purpose and scope, and we have analyzed them to discover the emerging trends in the research field. Thus, AI methodologies seem to be gaining ground, in combination with AR and VR technologies. Companies, universities, and researchers invest time and money in the development of AI algorithms and systems that can create multimedia content, but also in the development of virtual and augmented reality technologies and applications, for everyday and widespread use by larger audiences. The GPT system (GPT3, as of writing) is expanding exponentially and becoming more and more efficient in creating narratives. Based on the latest machine learning methods, these systems learn by themselves by crawling web pages and by collecting crowdsourced data. However, as they proliferate, they also create new technological challenges such as whether the data they collect is correct and accurate, free from bias, whether such a system can distinguish cultural differences between countries, races, and ethnicities and reproduce them when necessary or whether it is possible to manipulate the system to produce a text that follows specific rules, without deviating from a desirable trajectory.
Continuing our research, we will try to train GPT3 models using valid scientific data related to the artifacts of a specific exhibition in the Hunterian Museum in Glasgow, Scotland. The relevant data have been collected by other researchers in the field [125], who also created audio narratives that are broadcasted inside the museum. Next, we plan on instructing the system to create new narratives and answer related questions and report on our results.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.T. and G.C.; methodology, G.T.; validation, G.A. and G.C.; formal analysis, G.T.; investigation, G.T.; resources, G.T.; data curation, G.T.; writing—original draft preparation, G.T.; writing—review and editing, G.A. and G.C.; visualization, G.T. and G.A.; supervision, G.C.; project administration, G.T. and G.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
ARAugmented Reality
DSDigital Storytelling
IDSInteractive Digital Storytelling
IDNInteractive Digital Narrative
GPTGenerative Pre-trained Transformer
DNDigital Narrative
CDSComputational Digital Storytelling
CHCultural Heritage
EMExperience Manager
PWPossible Worlds
MINEMultiplayer Interactive Narrative Experience
AIArtificial Intelligence
GPSGlobal Positioning System
NPCNon-Player Character
PCGProcedural Content Generation
GFIGoals Feedback Interpretation
APIApplication Programming Interface
IFInteractive Fiction
DGEData Generation Engine
CINCinematic Interactive Narrative
iDocInteractive Documentary
TNTangible Narratives
UXUser Experience
VRVirtual Reality

Notes

1
http://tecfalabs.unige.ch/narrativeacts_vis/, accessed on 24 January 2023.
2
https://raffba.itch.io/med10, accessed on 24 January 2023.
3
https://eae-git.eng.utah.edu/01221789/utahpia2, accessed on 24 January 2023.
4
Film available on https://tilefilms.ie/productions/faoladh/, accessed on 24 January 2023.
5
https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1HDbXisLOevXUTHFiHbBXAo7NWVxLIFo&usp=sharing, accessed on 24 January 2023.

References

  1. Bedford, L. Storytelling: The Real Work of Museums. Curator Mus. J. 2001, 44, 27–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Roussou, M.; Pujol, L.; Katifori, A.; Chrysanthi, A.; Perry, S.; Vayanou, M. The Museum as Digital Storyteller: Collaborative Participatory Creation of Interactive Digital Experiences. 2015. Available online: https://mw2015.museumsandtheweb.com/paper/the-museum-as-digital-storyteller-collaborative-participatory-creation-of-interactive-digital-experiences/index.html (accessed on 24 January 2023).
  3. Ryan, J.O.; Mateas, M.; Wardrip-Fruin, N. Open Design Challenges for Interactive Emergent Narrative. In Proceedings of the ICIDS, Copenhagen, Denmark, 30 November–4 December 2015. [Google Scholar]
  4. Miller, C.H. Digital Storytelling: A Creator’s Guide to Interactive Entertainment; Routledge: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  5. Abas, H.; Zaman, H.B. Digital Storytelling Design with Augmented Reality Technology for Remedial Students in Learning Bahasa Melayu. Glob. Learn 2010, 2010, 3558–3563. [Google Scholar]
  6. Aylett, R.; Louchart, S. Being There: Participants and Spectators in Interactive Narrative. In International Conference on Virtual Storytelling. Using Virtual Reality Technologies for Storytelling; Cavazza, M., Donikian, S., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2007; pp. 117–128. [Google Scholar]
  7. Adams, E.W. Resolutions to Some Problems in Interactive Storytelling; Teeside University: Middlesborough, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  8. Chauvin, S.; Levieux, G.; Donnart, J.Y.; Natkin, S. Making sense of emergent narratives: An architecture supporting player-triggered narrative processes. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence and Games (CIG), Tainan, Taiwan, 31 August–2 September 2015; pp. 91–98. [Google Scholar]
  9. Ryan, M.L. Possible Worlds, Artificial Intelligence, and Narrative Theory; Indiana University Press: Bloomington, IN, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  10. Szilas, N.; Marano, M.; Estupiñán, S. A Tool for Interactive Visualization of Narrative Acts. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 176–180. [Google Scholar]
  11. Peinado, F.; Gervás, P. Transferring Game Mastering Laws to Interactive Digital Storytelling. In International Conference on Technologies for Interactive Digital Storytelling and Entertainment; Göbel, S., Spierling, U., Hoffmann, A., Iurgel, I., Schneider, O., Dechau, J., Feix, A., Eds.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2004; pp. 48–54. [Google Scholar]
  12. Spawforth, C.; Gibbins, N.; Millard, D.E. StoryMINE: A System for Multiplayer Interactive Narrative Experiences. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 534–543. [Google Scholar]
  13. Psomadaki, O.I.; Dimoulas, C.A.; Kalliris, G.M.; Paschalidis, G. Digital storytelling and audience engagement in cultural heritage management: A collaborative model based on the Digital City of Thessaloniki. J. Cult. Herit. 2019, 36, 12–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Young, M. Planning in Narrative Generation: A Review of Plan-Based Approaches to the Generation of Story, Discourse and Interactivity in Narratives. Sprache Datenverarb. Spec. Issue Form. Comput. Model. Narrat. 2015, 37, 41–64. [Google Scholar]
  15. Shibolet, Y.; Knoller, N.; Koenitz, H. A Framework for Classifying and Describing Authoring Tools for Interactive Digital Narrative. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 523–533. [Google Scholar]
  16. Green, D.; Hargood, C.; Charles, F. Contemporary Issues in Interactive Storytelling Authoring Systems. In Proceedings of the ICIDS, Dublin, Ireland, 5–8 December 2018. [Google Scholar]
  17. Green, D. Novella: An Authoring Tool for Interactive Storytelling in Games. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 556–559. [Google Scholar]
  18. Kitromili, S.; Jordan, J.; Millard, D.E. How Do Writing Tools Shape Interactive Stories? In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 514–522. [Google Scholar]
  19. Mu, C. A Research on Storytelling of Interactive Documentary: Towards a New Storytelling Theory Model. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 181–184. [Google Scholar]
  20. Kybartas, B.; Bidarra, R. A Survey on Story Generation Techniques for Authoring Computational Narratives. IEEE Trans. Comput. Intell. AI Games 2017, 9, 239–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kasunic, A.; Kaufman, G.F. Learning to Listen: Critically Considering the Role of AI in Human Storytelling and Character Creation. 2018. Available online: https://aclanthology.org/W18-1501 (accessed on 24 January 2023).
  22. Purdy, C.; Riedl, M.O. Reading Between the Lines: Using Plot Graphs to Draw Inferences from Stories. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Nack, F., Gordon, A.S., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 197–208. [Google Scholar]
  23. Van Broeckhoven, F.; Vlieghe, J.; De Troyer, O. Using a Controlled Natural Language for Specifying the Narratives of Serious Games. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Schoenau-Fog, H., Bruni, L.E., Louchart, S., Baceviciute, S., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 142–153. [Google Scholar]
  24. Riedl, M.O. Computational narrative intelligence: A human-centered goal for artificial intelligence. arXiv 2016, arXiv:1602.06484. [Google Scholar]
  25. Riedl, M.O.; Harrison, B. Using Stories to Teach Human Values to Artificial Agents. In Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop: AI, Ethics, and Society, Phoenix, AZ, USA, 12–13 February 2016. [Google Scholar]
  26. Soares, N.; Fallenstein, B. Aligning Superintelligence with Human Interests: A Technical Research Agenda; Machine Intelligence Research Institute: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  27. Mitchell, A.; Spierling, U.; Hargood, C.; Millard, D.E. Authoring for Interactive Storytelling. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 544–547. [Google Scholar]
  28. Vrettakis, E.; Kourtis, V.; Katifori, A.; Karvounis, M.; Lougiakis, C.; Ioannidis, Y.E. Narralive—Creating and experiencing mobile digital storytelling in cultural heritage. Digit. Appl. Archaeol. Cult. Herit. 2019, 15, 00114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Pujol, L.; Roussou, M.; Poulo, S.; Balet, O.; Vayanou, M.; Ioannidis, Y.E. Personalizing Interactive Digital Storytelling in Archaeological Museums: The CHESS Project; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  30. Garbe, J.; Kreminski, M.; Samuel, B.; Wardrip-Fruin, N.; Mateas, M. StoryAssembler: An Engine for Generating Dynamic Choice-Driven Narratives. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (FDG ’19), San Luis Obispo, CA, USA, 26–30 August 2019; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Miller, C.; Dighe, M.; Martens, C.; Jhala, A. Stories of the Town: Balancing Character Autonomy and Coherent Narrative in Procedurally Generated Worlds. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (FDG ’19), San Luis Obispo, CA, USA, 26–30 August 2019; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kybartas, B.; Verbrugge, C.; Lessard, J. Subject and Subjectivity: A Conversational Game Using Possible Worlds. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Nunes, N., Oakley, I., Nisi, V., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 332–335. [Google Scholar]
  33. Kreminski, M.; Dickinson, M.; Wardrip-Fruin, N. Felt: A Simple Story Sifter. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Swizerland, 2019; pp. 267–281. [Google Scholar]
  34. Kawagoe, S.; Ueno, M.; Isahara, H. A study on the efficiency of creating stories by the use of templates. In Proceedings of the 2015 2nd International Conference on Advanced Informatics: Concepts, Theory and Applications (ICAICTA), Chonburi, Thailand, 19–22 August 2015; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Kybartas, B.; Verbrugge, C.; Lessard, J. Expressive Range Analysis of a Possible Worlds Driven Emergent Narrative System. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 473–477. [Google Scholar]
  36. Guzdial, M.J.; Harrison, B.; Li, B.; Riedl, M.O. Crowdsourcing Open Interactive Narrative. In Proceedings of the FDG, Pacific Grove, CA, USA, 22–25 June 2015. [Google Scholar]
  37. Howard, K.T.; Donley, R. Using Ink and Interactive Fiction to Teach Interactive Design. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 68–72. [Google Scholar]
  38. Stefnisson, I.S.; Thue, D. Mimisbrunnur: AI-Assisted Authoring for Interactive Storytelling. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment (AIIDE’18), Edmonton, AB, Canada, 13–17 November; AAAI Press: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  39. Szilas, N.; Estupiñán, S.; Richle, U. Automatic Detection of Conflicts in Complex Narrative Structures. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 415–427. [Google Scholar]
  40. Hargood, C.; Weal, M.J.; Millard, D.E. The StoryPlaces Platform: Building a Web-Based Locative Hypertext System. In Proceedings of the 29th on Hypertext and Social Media (HT ’18), Baltimore, MD, USA, 9–12 July 2018; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 128–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Green, D.; Hargood, C.; Charles, F. A Novel Design Pipeline for Authoring Tools. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 102–110. [Google Scholar]
  42. Vrettakis, E.; Lougiakis, C.; Katifori, A.; Kourtis, V.; Christoforidis, S.; Karvounis, M.; Ioanidis, Y. The Story Maker—An Authoring Tool for Multimedia-Rich Interactive Narratives. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 349–352. [Google Scholar]
  43. Molnar, A.; Kostkova, P. Interactive Digital Storytelling Based Educational Games: Formalise, Author, Play, Educate and Enjoy! —The Edugames4all Project Framework. In Transactions on Edutainment XII; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; Volume 9292, pp. 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Compton, K.; Kybartas, B.; Mateas, M. Tracery: An Author-Focused Generative Text Tool. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Schoenau-Fog, H., Bruni, L.E., Louchart, S., Baceviciute, S., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 154–161. [Google Scholar]
  45. Martens, C.; Iqbal, O. Villanelle: An Authoring Tool for Autonomous Characters in Interactive Fiction. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 290–303. [Google Scholar]
  46. Martens, C.; Iqbal, O.; Azad, S.; Ingling, M.; Mosolf, A.; McCamey, E.; Timmer, J. Villanelle: Towards Authorable Autonomous Characters in Interactive Narrative. In Proceedings of the INT/WICED@AIIDE, Edmonton, AL, Canada, 13–14 November 2018. [Google Scholar]
  47. Brown, S.A.; Chu, S.L.; Quek, F.; Canaday, P.; Li, Q.; Loustau, T.; Wu, S.; Zhang, L. Towards a Gesture-Based Story Authoring System: Design Implications from Feature Analysis of Iconic Gestures During Storytelling. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 364–373. [Google Scholar]
  48. Sanghrajka, R.; Young, R.M.; Salisbury, B.; Lang, E.W. ShowRunner: A Tool for Storyline Execution/Visualization in 3D Game Environments. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 323–327. [Google Scholar]
  49. Battad, Z.; White, A.; Si, M. Facilitating Information Exploration of Archival Library Materials Through Multi-modal Storytelling. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 120–127. [Google Scholar]
  50. Katsui, T.; Ueno, M.; Isahara, H. A creation support system to manage the story structure based on template sets and graph. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Japanese Society for Artificial Intelligence, 4F1-3in2, Nagoya, Japan, 30 July 2018. [Google Scholar]
  51. Katsui, T.; Ueno, M.; Isahara, H. An analysis on the process of creating stories by the creation support system. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Advanced Informatics, Concepts, Theory, and Applications (ICAICTA), Denpasar, Indonesia, 16–18 August 2017; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
  52. Battad, Z.; Si, M. Apply Storytelling Techniques for Describing Time-Series Data. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 483–488. [Google Scholar]
  53. Kapadia, M.; Frey, S.; Shoulson, A.; Sumner, R.W.; Gross, M.H. CANVAS: Computer-assisted narrative animation synthesis. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Computer Animation, Zurich, Switzerland, 11–13 July 2016. [Google Scholar]
  54. Alinam, M.; Ciotoli, L.; Koceva, F.; Torre, I. Digital Storytelling in a Museum Application Using the Web of Things. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 75–82. [Google Scholar]
  55. Cesário, V.; Olim, S.; Nisi, V. A Natural History Museum Experience: Memories of Carvalhal’s Palace—Turning Point. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 339–343. [Google Scholar]
  56. Revells, T.; Chai, Y. Digital Narrative, Documents and Interactive Public History. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 361–364. [Google Scholar]
  57. Suckling, M. Dungeon on the Move: A Case Study of a Procedurally Driven Narrative Project in Progress. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 144–147. [Google Scholar]
  58. De Kegel, B.; Haahr, M. Towards Procedural Generation of Narrative Puzzles for Adventure Games. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 241–249. [Google Scholar]
  59. Morgan, L.; Haahr, M. Honey, I’m Home: An Adventure Game with Procedurally Generated Narrative Puzzles. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 335–338. [Google Scholar]
  60. Kreminski, M.; Wardrip-Fruin, N. Throwing Bottles at God: Predictive Text as a Game Mechanic in an AI-Based Narrative Game. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 275–279. [Google Scholar]
  61. Nielsen, T.L.; Rafferty, E.I.; Schoenau-Fog, H.; Palamas, G. Embedded Narratives in Procedurally Generated Environments. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 30–43. [Google Scholar]
  62. Miller, C.; Dighe, M.; Martens, C.; Jhala, A. Crafting Interactive Narrative Games with Adversarial Planning Agents from Simulations. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 44–57. [Google Scholar]
  63. Echeverri, D.; Wei, H. Letters to José: A Design Case for Building Tangible Interactive Narratives. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 15–29. [Google Scholar]
  64. Huang, C.C.; Lin, Y.J.; Zeng, X.; Newman, M.; O’Modhrain, S. Olegoru: A Soundscape Composition Tool to Enhance Imaginative Storytelling with Tangible Objects. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI ’15), Stanford, CA, USA, 15–19 January 2015; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2015; pp. 709–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Doherty, S.; Snow, S.; Jennings, K.; Rose, B.; Matthews, B.; Viller, S. Vim: A Tangible Energy Story. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 271–280. [Google Scholar]
  66. Liang, H.; Chang, J.; Kazmi, I.K.; Zhang, J.J.; Jiao, P. Hand gesture-based interactive puppetry system to assist storytelling for children. Vis. Comput. 2017, 33, 517–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Wicke, P.; Veale, T. Wheels Within Wheels: A Causal Treatment of Image Schemas in An Embodied Storytelling System. In Proceedings of the TriCoLore, Bozen-Bolzano, Italy, 13–15 December 2018. [Google Scholar]
  68. Tokunaga, S.; Seaborn, K.; Tamura, K.; Otake-Matsuura, M. Cognitive Training for Older Adults with a Dialogue-Based, Robot-Facilitated Storytelling System. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 405–409. [Google Scholar]
  69. Bowman, A. Creating a Virtual Support Group in an Interactive Narrative: A Companionship Game for Cancer Patients. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 662–665. [Google Scholar]
  70. Svensson, T. Using VR to Simulate Interactable AR Storytelling. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 328–332. [Google Scholar]
  71. Vosmeer, M.; Sandovar, A.; Schouten, B. From Literary Novel to Radio Drama to VR Project. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 392–400. [Google Scholar]
  72. Green, C.P.; Holmquist, L.E.; Gibson, S. Towards the Emergent Theatre: A Novel Approach for Creating Live Emergent Narratives Using Finite State Machines. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 92–101. [Google Scholar]
  73. Thorne, B.R.; Winer, D.R.; Barot, C.; Young, R.M. Firebolt: A System for Automated Low-Level Cinematic Narrative Realization. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 333–342. [Google Scholar]
  74. Dowling, D.; Fearghail, C.O.; Smolic, A.; Knorr, S. Faoladh: A Case Study in Cinematic VR Storytelling and Production. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 359–362. [Google Scholar]
  75. Basaraba, N.; Conlan, O.; Edmond, J.; Arnds, P. User Testing Persuasive Interactive Web Documentaries: An Empirical Study. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 83–91. [Google Scholar]
  76. Bala, P.; Dionisio, M.; Andrade, T.; Nisi, V. Tell a Tail 360: Immersive Storytelling on Animal Welfare. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 357–360. [Google Scholar]
  77. Svensson, T.; Holloway-Attaway, L.; Beroldy, E. Leaving the Small Screen: Telling News Stories in a VR Simulation of an AR News Service. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 352–355. [Google Scholar]
  78. Stavrakakis, N. Live News Visualization on the Map of Greece. 2020. [Google Scholar]
  79. Martin, L.J.; Harrison, B.; Riedl, M.O. Improvisational Computational Storytelling in Open Worlds. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Nack, F., Gordon, A.S., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 73–84. [Google Scholar]
  80. Berov, L. A Character Focused Iterative Simulation Approach to Computational Storytelling. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 494–497. [Google Scholar]
  81. Schoenau-Fog, H. Adaptive storyworlds. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 58–65. [Google Scholar]
  82. Womack, J.; Freeman, W. Interactive Narrative Generation Using Location and Genre Specific Context. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 343–347. [Google Scholar]
  83. Austin, J. The Book of Endless History: Authorial Use of GPT2 for Interactive Storytelling. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 429–432. [Google Scholar]
  84. Kreminski, M.; Wardrip-Fruin, N. Sketching a Map of the Storylets Design Space. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 160–164. [Google Scholar]
  85. Martin, L.J.; Ammanabrolu, P.; Wang, X.; Hancock, W.; Singh, S.; Harrison, B.; Riedl, M.O. Event Representations for Automated Story Generation with Deep Neural Nets. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Second AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Thirtieth Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference and Eighth AAAI Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’18/IAAI’18/EAAI’18), New Orleans, LA, USA, 2–7 February 2018; AAAI Press: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  86. Amos-Binks, A.; Potts, C.; Young, R. Planning Graphs for Efficient Generation of Desirable Narrative Trajectories. Proc. AAAI Conf. Artif. Intell. Interact. Digit. Entertain. 2021, 13, 146–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Xu, W.; Hargood, C.; Tang, W.; Charles, F. Towards Generating Stylistic Dialogues for Narratives Using Data-Driven Approaches. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 462–472. [Google Scholar]
  88. Short, E. Beyond branching: Quality-based, salience-based, and waypoint narrative structures. Available online: https://emshort.blog/2016/04/12/beyond-branching-quality-based-and-salience-based-narrative-structures/ (accessed on 24 January 2023).
  89. Koenitz, H.; Dubbelman, T.; Knoller, N.; Roth, C.; Haahr, M.; Sezen, D.; Sezen, T.I. Card-Based Methods in Interactive Narrative Prototyping. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 552–555. [Google Scholar]
  90. Koenitz, H.; Dubbelman, T.; Roth, C. An Educational Program in Interactive Narrative Design. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 22–25. [Google Scholar]
  91. Bernstein, M.; Palosaari Eladhari, M.; Koenitz, H.; Louchart, S.; Nack, F.; Martens, C.; Rossi, G.C.; Bosser, A.G.; Millard, D.E. ICIDS2020 Panel: Building the Discipline of Interactive Digital Narratives. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 3–11. [Google Scholar]
  92. Shelton, C.C.; Warren, A.E.; Archambault, L.M. Exploring the Use of Interactive Digital Storytelling Video: Promoting Student Engagement and Learning in a University Hybrid Course. TechTrends 2016, 60, 465–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Rizvic, S.; Boskovic, D.; Okanovic, V.; Sljivo, S.; Zukic, M. Interactive digital storytelling: Bringing cultural heritage in a classroom. J. Comput. Educ. 2019, 6, 143–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Smith, A.; Mott, B.; Taylor, S.; Hubbard-Cheuoua, A.; Minogue, J.; Oliver, K.; Ringstaff, C. Toward a Block-Based Programming Approach to Interactive Storytelling for Upper Elementary Students. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 111–119. [Google Scholar]
  95. Rizvic, S.; Djapo, N.; Alispahic, F.; Hadzihalilovic, B.; Cengic, F.F.; Imamovic, A.; Okanovic, V.; Boskovic, D. Guidelines for interactive digital storytelling presentations of cultural heritage. In Proceedings of the 2017 9th International Conference on Virtual Worlds and Games for Serious Applications (VS-Games), Athens, Greece, 6–8 September 2017; pp. 253–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Rouse, R. Partners: Human and Nonhuman Performers and Interactive Narrative in Postdigital Theater. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 369–382. [Google Scholar]
  97. Strugnell, J.; Berry, M.; Zambetta, F.; Greuter, S. Narrative Improvisation: Simulating Game Master Choices. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 428–441. [Google Scholar]
  98. Kawano, Y.; Takaya, E.; Yamanobe, K.; Kurihara, S. Automatic Plot Generation Framework for Scenario Creation. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 453–461. [Google Scholar]
  99. Robertson, J.; Young, R.M. Automated Gameplay Generation from Declarative World Representations. Proc. AAAI Conf. Artif. Intell. Interact. Digit. Entertain. 2021, 11, 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Spawforth, C.; Millard, D.E. A Framework for Multi-participant Narratives Based on Multiplayer Game Interactions. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Nunes, N., Oakley, I., Nisi, V., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 150–162. [Google Scholar]
  101. Cardona-Rivera, R.E.; Zagal, J.P.; Debus, M.S. GFI: A Formal Approach to Narrative Design and Game Research. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Bosser, A.G., Millard, D.E., Hargood, C., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 133–148. [Google Scholar]
  102. Chu, J.H. Designing Tangible Interfaces to Support Expression and Sensemaking in Interactive Narratives. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction, Stanford, CA, USA, 15–19 January 2015. [Google Scholar]
  103. Chu, J.H.; Mazalek, A. Embodied Engagement with Narrative: A Design Framework for Presenting Cultural Heritage Artifacts. Multimodal Technol. Interact. 2019, 3, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Chu, S.L.; Quek, F.; Sridharamurthy, K. Augmenting Children’s Creative Self-Efficacy and Performance through Enactment-Based Animated Storytelling. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI ’15), Stanford, CA, USA, 15–19 January 2015; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2015; pp. 209–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Paradeda, R.; Ferreira, M.J.; Martinho, C.; Paiva, A. Communicating Assertiveness in Robotic Storytellers. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 442–452. [Google Scholar]
  106. Paradeda, R.; Ferreira, M.J.; Martinho, C.; Paiva, A. Would You Follow the Suggestions of a Storyteller Robot? In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 489–493. [Google Scholar]
  107. Striepe, H.; Lugrin, B. There Once Was a Robot Storyteller: Measuring the Effects of Emotion and Non-verbal Behaviour. In International Conference on Social Robotics; Kheddar, A., Yoshida, E., Ge, S.S., Suzuki, K., Cabibihan, J.J., Eyssel, F., He, H., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 126–136. [Google Scholar]
  108. Ozaeta, L.; Graña, M. On Intelligent Systems for Storytelling. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference SOCO’18-CISIS’18-ICEUTE’18, San Sebastian, Spain, 6–8 June 2018; Graña, M., López-Guede, J.M., Etxaniz, O., Herrero, Á., Sáez, J.A., Quintián, H., Corchado, E., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 571–578. [Google Scholar]
  109. Ko, D.u.; Ryu, H.; Kim, J. Making New Narrative Structures with Actor’s Eye-Contact in Cinematic Virtual Reality (CVR). In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 343–347. [Google Scholar]
  110. Kampa, A. Authoring Concepts and Tools for Interactive Digital Storytelling in the Field of Mobile Augmented Reality. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Nunes, N., Oakley, I., Nisi, V., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 372–375. [Google Scholar]
  111. Bhide, S.; Goins, E.; Geigel, J. Experimental Analysis of Spatial Sound for Storytelling in Virtual Reality. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 3–7. [Google Scholar]
  112. Barnard, D. fanSHEN’s Looking for Love: A Case Study in How Theatrical and Performative Practices Inform Interactive Digital Narratives. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 401–407. [Google Scholar]
  113. Schalk, S. Vox Populi. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 408–411. [Google Scholar]
  114. Vosmeer, M.; Schouten, B. Project Orpheus A Research Study into 360° Cinematic VR. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online Video (TVX ’17), Hilversum, The Netherlands, 14–16 June 2017; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 85–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Pillai, J.S.; Verma, M. Grammar of VR Storytelling: Narrative Immersion and Experiential Fidelity in VR Cinema. In Proceedings of the The 17th International Conference on Virtual-Reality Continuum and Its Applications in Industry (VRCAI ’19), Brisbane, QLD, Australia, 14–16 November 2019; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Thue, D.; Schiffel, S.; Árnason, R.A.; Stefnisson, I.S.; Steinarsson, B. Delayed Roles with Authorable Continuity in Plan-Based Interactive Storytelling. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Nack, F., Gordon, A.S., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 258–269. [Google Scholar]
  117. Thue, D.; Schiffel, S.; Guethmundsson, T.P.; Kristjánsson, G.F.; Eiríksson, K.; Björnsson, M.V. Open World Story Generation for Increased Expressive Range. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Nunes, N., Oakley, I., Nisi, V., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 313–316. [Google Scholar]
  118. Radford, A.; Narasimhan, K. Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training. 2018. Available online: https://openai.com/blog/language-unsupervised/ (accessed on 24 January 2023).
  119. Language Models are Few-Shot Learners. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems; Larochelle, H., Ranzato, M., Hadsell, R., Balcan, M., Lin, H., Eds.; Curran Associates, Inc.: Red Hook, NY, USA, 2020; Volume 33, pp. 1877–1901. [Google Scholar]
  120. Schoenau-Fog, H.; Larsen, B.A. Creating Interactive Adaptive Real Time Story Worlds. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Rouse, R., Koenitz, H., Haahr, M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 548–551. [Google Scholar]
  121. Li, B.; Lee-Urban, S.; Johnston, G.; Riedl, M.O. Story Generation with Crowdsourced Plot Graphs. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI’13); AAAI Press: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 2013; pp. 598–604. [Google Scholar]
  122. Molnar, A. The effect of interactive digital storytelling gamification on microbiology classroom interactions. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC), Princeton, NJ, USA, 10 March 2018; pp. 243–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Rouse, R. Someone Else’s Story: An Ethical Approach to Interactive Narrative Design for Cultural Heritage. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Cardona-Rivera, R.E., Sullivan, A., Young, R.M., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 47–60. [Google Scholar]
  124. Vayanou, M.; Katifori, A.; Karvounis, M.; Kourtis, V.; Kyriakidi, M.; Roussou, M.; Tsangaris, M.; Ioannidis, Y.; Balet, O.; Prados, T.; et al. Authoring Personalized Interactive Museum Stories. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Mitchell, A., Fernández-Vara, C., Thue, D., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; pp. 37–48. [Google Scholar]
  125. Roussou, M.; Ripanti, F.; Servi, K. Engaging visitors of archaeological sites through ‘emotive’ storytelling experiences: A pilot at the Ancient Agora of Athens. Archeol. Calc. 2017, 28, 405–420. [Google Scholar]
  126. De Kegel, B.; Haahr, M. Procedural Puzzle Generation: A Survey. IEEE Trans. Games 2020, 12, 21–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Gorbet, M.G.; Orth, M.; Ishii, H. Triangles: Tangible interface for manipulation and exploration of digital information topography. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 18–23 April 1998. [Google Scholar]
  128. Catala, A.; Theune, M.; Sylla, C.; Ribeiro, P. Bringing Together Interactive Digital Storytelling with Tangible Interaction: Challenges and Opportunities. In International Conference on Interactive Digital Storytelling; Nunes, N., Oakley, I., Nisi, V., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 395–398. [Google Scholar]
  129. Al-Shamayleh, A.S.; Ahmad, R.B.; Abushariah, M.A.A.M.; Alam, K.A.; Jomhari, N. A systematic literature review on vision based gesture recognition techniques. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2018, 77, 28121–28184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Rautaray, S.S.; Agrawal, A. Vision based hand gesture recognition for human computer interaction: A survey. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2015, 43, 1–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Wicke, P.; Veale, T. Storytelling by a Show of Hands: A Framework for Interactive Embodied Storytelling in Robotic Agents. 2018. Available online: http://haddock.ucd.ie/Papers/AISB18-Wicke-Veale.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2022).
  132. Wicke, P.; Veale, T. Interview with the Robot: Question-Guided Collaboration in a Storytelling System. In Proceedings of the ICCC, Chengdu, China, 7–10 December 2018. [Google Scholar]
  133. Caić, M.; Mahr, D.; Oderkerken-Schröder, G. Value of social robots in services: Social cognition perspective. J. Serv. Mark. 2019, 33, 463–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Paradeda, R.B.; Martinho, C.; Paiva, A. Persuasion Based on Personality Traits: Using a Social Robot as Storyteller. In Proceedings of the Companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ’17), Vienna, Austria, 6–9 March 2017; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 367–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
Download PDF
Colorants Detected by HPLC-PDA in Textiles from 13th Century Lieto Ristinpelto, Finland
Previous
An Online Dissemination Workflow for the Scientific Process in CH through Semantic 3D: EMtools and EMviq Open Source Tools
Next