Danesh
Hefazat va Maremat
Volume 9, Issue 1 (6-2026)
KCR 2026, 9(1): 1-15 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Altaha Bonab S, GHAREHBAGLOU M, MIJANI M. Application of the Metaverse in relation to cultural heritage requirements based on international documents and conventions. , KCR. 2026; 9 (1) :1-15
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/kcr/article-1-242-en.html
URL: http://journal.richt.ir/kcr/article-1-242-en.html
Department of Architecture and Urbanism, Tabriz Islamic Art University, Tabriz, East Azerbaijan Province, Iran
Abstract: (1402 Views)
Historic urban fabrics and architectural heritage are subject to a wide range of international charters and conventions that establish guiding principles for conservation, restoration, documentation, reconstruction, and cultural tourism. Foundational documents such as the Venice Charter, the Nara Document on Authenticity, UNESCO conventions, and the Burra Charter emphasize concepts including authenticity, integrity, accurate documentation, and the responsible use of heritage resources. In practice, however, the implementation of these principles has become increasingly complex due to factors such as physical deterioration, natural hazards, restricted accessibility, and the growing pressures of mass tourism.
In recent years, advances in immersive digital technologies have introduced alternative approaches to addressing these challenges. Among them, the Metaverse understood as a three-dimensional digital environment integrating Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) has gained attention as a platform for experiencing, documenting, and interpreting cultural heritage. Unlike conventional visualization or presentation tools, Metaverse-based environments allow users to engage with heritage spaces interactively and remotely, often through digital avatars, thereby expanding possibilities for access and interpretation beyond physical constraints.
Although immersive technologies have been increasingly employed in heritage-related projects, their relationship with the normative frameworks defined by international heritage documents has not been sufficiently examined. Existing studies tend to focus on technical capabilities or user experience, while questions of compatibility with established conservation principles remain underexplored. This study seeks to address this gap by examining how Metaverse-related capabilities correspond to the requirements articulated in international charters and conventions concerning historic environments.
In recent years, advances in immersive digital technologies have introduced alternative approaches to addressing these challenges. Among them, the Metaverse understood as a three-dimensional digital environment integrating Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) has gained attention as a platform for experiencing, documenting, and interpreting cultural heritage. Unlike conventional visualization or presentation tools, Metaverse-based environments allow users to engage with heritage spaces interactively and remotely, often through digital avatars, thereby expanding possibilities for access and interpretation beyond physical constraints.
Although immersive technologies have been increasingly employed in heritage-related projects, their relationship with the normative frameworks defined by international heritage documents has not been sufficiently examined. Existing studies tend to focus on technical capabilities or user experience, while questions of compatibility with established conservation principles remain underexplored. This study seeks to address this gap by examining how Metaverse-related capabilities correspond to the requirements articulated in international charters and conventions concerning historic environments.
Keywords: Metaverse, historical context, Metaverse capabilities, application of metaverse in historical context, charters and statements
Type of Study: Research, Original, Regular |
Subject:
Application of modern sciences, technologies, equipment, materials and methods
Received: 2025/05/5 | Accepted: 2026/06/9 | Published: 2026/06/9
Received: 2025/05/5 | Accepted: 2026/06/9 | Published: 2026/06/9
References
1. (2012). Vienna Note on "World Heritage and Contemporary Architecture - Historic Urban Landscape Management". Manzar, Manzar Scientific Journal, (18) 4, 23-20(In Persian).
2. [(1391). یادداشت وین در مورد "میراث جهانی و معماری معاصر - مدیریت منظر شهری تاریخی". منظر، مجله علمی منظر ، (18) 4، 23-20]
3. Allam Z, Sharifi A, Bibri S E, Jones D S, Krogstie J. (2022). The metaverse as a virtual form of smart cities: Opportunities and challenges for environmental, economic, and social sustainability in urban futures. Smart Cities, 5(3), 771-801. http://mdpi.com/2624-6511/5/3/40 [DOI:10.3390/smartcities5030040]
4. Al-Tabeeb A K, Al-Desouqi A A. (2023). Metaverse in Architecture: An Approach to Documenting and Exploring the Egyptian Heritage Through Metaverse. Green Building & Construction Economics. 276-295. [DOI:10.37256/gbce.4220232300]
5. Baker J, Nam K, Dutt C S. (2023). A user experience perspective on heritage tourism in the metaverse: Empirical evidence and design dilemmas for VR. Information Technology & Tourism, 25(3), 265-306. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/S40558-023-00256-X [DOI:10.1007/s40558-023-00256-x]
6. Bamanian M R, Ansari M Almasifar N. (2010). Revitalizing the "Cultural Landscape" of Takht-e-Soleman with Emphasis on the Approaches to Recreating and Protecting ICOMOS World Heritage (Florence Charter, P. H. Childhead, Canadian Parks Agency Policy, United States National Park Service). Urban Management, 8(26), 7-26. https://sid.ir/paper/92179/fa (In Persian)
7. [بمانیان، م، انصاری، م، الماسی فر، ن. (1389). باززنده سازی «منظر فرهنگی» تخت سلیمان با تاکید بر رویکرد های بازآفرینی و حفاظت از میراث جهانی ICOMOS (منشور فلورانس, پی . اچ . چایلدهود, سیاست بنگاه پارکهای کانادایی, بنگاه پارک ملی ایالات متحده). مدیریت شهری، 8(26)، 7-26. https://sid.ir/paper/92179/fa]
8. Basiri S, Vatandoost R, Emami S M A, Ahmadi H.(2015). Explanation the concept of Integrity in the field of museum works, in terms of determining the affecting factors on it.4(8):111-131http://mmi.aui.ac.ir/article-1-126-fa.html (In Persian)
9. [بصیری، س، وطن دوست، ر، امامی، س م ا، احمدی، ح. (1393). تبیین مفهوم تمامیت در حوزه آثار موزه ای از منظر تعیین مولفه های موثر بر آن تبیین. مرمت و معماری ایران (مرمت آثار و بافت های تاریخی فرهنگی)، 4(8)، 111-131. https://sid.ir/paper/205150/fa]
10. Buhalis D, Karatay N. 2022. Mixed reality (MR) for generation Z in cultural heritage tourism towards metaverse. In ENTER22 e-Tourism Conference (pp. 16-27). Cham: Springer International Publishing. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-94751-4_2]
11. Campi M, Di Luggo A, Scandurra S. (2017). 3D modeling for the knowledge of architectural heritage and virtual reconstruction of its historical memory. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 42, 133-139.https://isprs-archives.copernicus.org/articles/XLII-2-W3/133/2017/ [DOI:10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W3-133-2017]
12. Canciani M, Conigliaro E, Del Grasso M, Papalini P, Saccone M. (2016). 3D survey and augmented reality for cultural heritage. The case study of Aurelian wall at Castra Praetoria in Rome. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 41, 931-937. https://isprs-archives.copernicus.org/articles/XLI-B5/931/2016/ [DOI:10.5194/isprsarchives-XLI-B5-931-2016]
13. Chehab A, Nakhal B. (2023). EXPLORING VIRTUAL REALITY AS AN APPROACH TO RESURRECT DESTROYED HISTORICAL BUILDINGS - AN APPROACH TO REVIVE THE DESTROYED "EGG BUILDING" THROUGH VR," Architecture and Planning Journal (APJ): Vol. 28: Iss. 3, Article 17. DOI: [DOI:10.54729/2789-8547.1212]
14. Cheraghchi S.(2004). Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage. Athar Scientific Quarterly. 25 (36 and 37):245-258. http://journal.richt.ir/athar/article-1-291-fa.html (In Persian)
15. [چراغچی،س.(۱۳۸۳).کنوانسیونصیانتاز«میراثفرهنگیناملموس».
16. Comes R, Neamțu C, Buna Z L, Bodi Ș, Popescu D, Tompa V, Mateescu-Suciu L. (2020). Enhancing accessibility to cultural heritage through digital content and virtual reality: A case study of the Sarmizegetusa Regia UNESCO site. Journal of Ancient History and Archaeology, 7(3). https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=911818 [DOI:10.14795/j.v7i3.561]
17. Condorelli F, Rinaudo F. (2018). Cultural heritage reconstruction from historical photographs and videos. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, 42, 259-265. http://isprs-archives.copernicus.org/articles/XLII-2/259/2018/isprs-archives-XLII-2-259-2018.html [DOI:10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-259-2018]
18. Corrales M, Rodríguez F, Merchán M J, Merchán P, Pérez E. (2024). Comparative Analysis between Virtual Visits and Pedagogical Outings to Heritage Sites: An Application in the Teaching of History. Heritage, 7(1), 366-379. https://www.mdpi.com/2571-9408/7/1/18 [DOI:10.3390/heritage7010018]
19. Dayoub B, Yang P, Omran S, Zhang Q, Dayoub A. (2024). Digital Silk Roads: Leveraging the Metaverse for Cultural Tourism within the Belt and Road Initiative Framework. Electronics, 13(12), 2306. http://mdpi.com/2079-9292/13/12/2306 [DOI:10.3390/electronics13122306]
20. Dewi E P, Budilaksono S, Suwartane I G A, Nurina N, Trikariastoto, T, Nurjaman H N, Wijaya A. (2024, March). Metaverse of Heritage Buildings in Jakarta's Old Town as a Media for Preservation and Historical Education Tourism. In Proceeding of the International Conference on Multidisciplinary Research for Sustainable Innovation (Vol.1,No.1,pp.549-559). https://proceeding.researchsynergypress.com/index.php/icmrsi/article/view/845 [DOI:10.31098/icmrsi.v1i.845]
21. Dzwierzynska J, Prokop A. (2022). Reconstruction of Historic Monuments-A Dual Approach. Sustainability, 14(21), 14651. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/21/14651 [DOI:10.3390/su142114651]
22. Fadainejad S, Hanachi P. (2014). Study and explanation of the evolution of policies and programs for the protection of cultural heritage, period from 1978 to 2012. Iranian Architectural Studies, 3(5), 21-37. https://sid.ir/paper/503512/fa (In Persian)
23. [فدایی نژاد، سمیه، و حناچی، پیروز. (1393). بررسی و تبیین سیر تحول سیاست ها و برنامه های حفاظت از میراث فرهنگی, بازه زمانی سال 1357 تا 1391. مطالعات معماری ایران، 3(5)، 21-37 https://sid.ir/paper/503512/fa ]
24. Fan Z, Chen C, Huang H. (2022). Immersive cultural heritage digital documentation and information service for historical figure metaverse: a case of Zhu Xi, Song Dynasty, China. Heritage Science, 10(1), 148. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40494-022-00749-8 [DOI:10.1186/s40494-022-00749-8]
25. Fanani A Z, Hastuti K, Syarif A M, Harsanto P W. (2021). Challenges in developing virtual reality, augmented reality and mixed-reality applications: Case Studies on a 3D-based tangible cultural heritage conservation. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 12(11). https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Challenges-in-Developing-Virtual-Reality%2C-Augmented-Fanani-Hastuti/b58d70fba0ec86ec834ec24acec79eecef2ef92f?p2df [DOI:10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0121126]
26. Fanani A Z, Syarif A M (2023). Historical Building 3D Reconstruction for a Virtual Reality-based Documentation. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, 14(9). https://www.proquest.com/openview/2b773d51151376af6bdc742348868e72/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=5444811 [DOI:10.14569/IJACSA.2023.0140985]
27. Gaafar A A. (2021). Metaverse in architectural heritage documentation & education. Advances in Ecological and Environmental Research, 6(10),66-86 https://www.ss-pub.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/AEER2021101401.pdf
28. Haddad N A, Fakhoury L A, Sakr Y M (2021). A critical anthology of international charters, conventions & principles on documentation of cultural heritage for conservation, monitoring & management. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry, 21(1),291-291. https://www.maajournal.com/index.php/maa/article/view/504
29. Han J, Vande Moere A, Simeone A L. (2024, May). Meaning Follows Purpose: Unravelling the Architectural Design Conventions in the Contemporary Metaverse. In Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1-22). https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.1145/3613904.3642519 [DOI:10.1145/3613904.3642519]
30. Hanachi P, Fadaei Nezhad S. (2011). A Conceptual Framework for Integrated Conservation and Regeneration in Historic Urban Areas. Journal of Fine Arts: Architecture & Urban Planning, 3(46), 15-26 (In Persian)
31. [حناچی، پ، فدایی نژاد، س. (1390). تدوین چارچوب مفهومی حفاظت و بازآفرینی یکپارچه در بافت های فرهنگی-تاریخی. نشریه هنرهای زیبا: معماری و شهرسازی، 3(46)، 26-15. https://jfaup.ut.ac.ir/article_25057.html]
32. Hatefi Shogae S, Zarei M E. (2017). Documenting and Evaluating the Restoration of Historic Gardens of Hamadan on the Basis of Florence Charter (Case Study: Nazari Garden and Home Gardens of Americans). The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 14(46), 31-40 (In Persian)
33. [هاتفی شجاع، س، ابراهیم زارعی، م. (۱۳۹۶). مستندسازی و ارزیابی بازسازی باغ های تاریخی همدان براساس منشور فلورانس (مطالعه موردی : باغ نظری و باغ خانه آمریکایی ها) .باغ نظر. 14(46) :4-31. https://www.bagh-sj.com/article_44357.html]
34. Hemmati M. (2022). The Metaverse: An Urban Revolution Effect of the Metaverse on the Perceptions of Urban Audience. Tourism of Culture, 2(7), 49-56. doi:10.22034/toc.2022.323276.1067 (In Persian)
35. [همتی، م. (1400). متاورس: یک انقلاب شهری تاثیر متاورس بر ادراک مخاطبان از شهر. گردشگری فرهنگ. 7(2): 49-56. https://www.toc-sj.com/article_143468.html]
36. International Charters for the Protection and Restoration of Historic Buildings and Sites (1931-2003) (Translated under the supervision of Ayatollah Shirazi). ICOMOS Cultural Institute of Iran(In Persian)
37. منشورهای بینالمللی حفاظت و مرمت بناها و محوطههای تاریخی (۱۹۳۱ ـ ۲۰۰۳) ( ترجمه زیر نظر آیت الله شیرازی). موسسه فرهنگی ایکوموس ایران.
38. Jun G. (2020). Virtual reality church as a new mission frontier in the metaverse: Exploring theological controversies and missional potential of virtual reality church. Transformation, 37(4), 297-305. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0265378820963155 [DOI:10.1177/0265378820963155]
39. Kari G, Karimi Azeri A R, Ettehad S. (2015). Designing Principles in Historical Buildings of Iran. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences: Proceedings, 3(4 (s)), pp-378. https://european-science.com/eojnss_proc/article/view/4178
40. Kashiripoor М М. (2023). Metaverse city: definition and direction development for urban planning and architecture. Вестник Брестского государственного технического университета, (3 (132)), 2-10. https://journal.bstu.by/index.php/bstu_herald/article/view/864
41. Kersten T P, Büyüksalih G, Tschirschwitz F, Kan T, Deggim S, Kaya Y, Baskaraca A P. (2017). The Selimiye Mosque of Edirne, Turkey-an immersive and interactive virtual reality experience using HTC Vive. The international archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences, 42, 403-409. https://isprs-archives.copernicus.org/articles/XLII-5-W1/403/2017/ [DOI:10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-5-W1-403-2017]
42. Mahardika M S, Junaidy D W, Gary A A P, Mauludi E, Husni D S, Agirachman F A, Wibisono A. (2023). Preserving History in The Metaverse: A Platform to Digitize the Campus Cultural Heritage in Indonesia.
43. Mahmoudi Ghozhdi M R, Talebian M H, Vatan Doost R. (1401). Explaining the shaping components of the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (1972) in the context of time. Iranian Architectural Studies, 11(22), 215-236. https://sid.ir/paper/1053095/fa (In Persian)
44. محمودی قوژدی، م ر، طالبیان، م ح، وطن دوست، ر. (1401). تبیین مؤلفه های شکل دهنده ی کنوانسیون حمایت از میراث فرهنگی و طبیعی جهان (1972) در بستر زمان. مطالعات معماری ایران، 11(22)، 215-236. https://sid.ir/paper/1053095/fa
45. Merchán M J, Merchán P, Pérez E. (2021). Good practices in the use of augmented reality for the dissemination of architectural heritage of rural areas. Applied Sciences, 11(5), 2055. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/11/5/2055 [DOI:10.3390/app11052055]
46. Mirashrafi A H. (1401). Scientific study and analysis of the metaverse world and its future prospects. New Approaches in Islamic Studies, (4)12,404-387. https://civilica.com/doc/1880162/ (In Persian)
47. [میراشرفی، ا ح. (1401). بررسی و تحلیل علمی دنیای متاورس و چشمانداز آینده آن. رهیافت های نوین در مطالعات اسلامی، (4)12، -404-387. https://civilica.com/doc/1880162/]
48. Mohammadi H, Behboodi Sadabad M. (2021). Foresight Application in conservation planning for urban Historical Context - The Case of world heritage core zone Yazd city. Geographical Urban Planning Research (GUPR), 9(2), 417-437. doi: 10.22059/jurbangeo.2021.313532.1403(In Persian)
49. [محمدی، ح، بهبودی سعدآباد، م. (1400). کاربست آیندهپژوهی در برنامهریزی حفاظتی بافت تاریخی (مورد نمونه: عرصۀ ثبت جهانی یزد). پژوهشهای جغرافیای برنامهریزی شهری. 9(2): 417-437. doi:10.22059/jurbangeo.2021.313532.1403 ]
50. Münster S, Apollonio F I, Bluemel I, Fallavollita F, Foschi R, Grellert M, Schelbert G. (2024). Handbook of Digital 3D Reconstruction of Historical Architecture (p. 204). Springer Nature. https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/90414 [DOI:10.1007/978-3-031-43363-4]
51. Pourmoghaddam A r. (2004). Nara Statement - Journal of Restoration and Cultural Heritage Knowledge. (In Persian)
52. [پورمقدم، ا ر. (1383). بیانیه نارا - مجله دانش مرمت و میراث فرهنگی.]
53. Sajjadian M, Firouzi M A, Pourahmad A. (1400). Metaverse and "metaverse" and "crypto" cities; A study on conscious use in Iran. Quarterly Journal of Geography and Urban Planning Zagros Landscape, (49)13, 7-40. https://sanad.iau.ir/Journal/zagros/Article/937789 (In Persian)
54. [سجادیان، م، فیروزی، م ع، پوراحمد، ا. (1400). متاورس و شهرهای «متاورسی» و «کریپتویی»؛ تدقیقی بر بهرهگیری آگاهانه در کشور ایران. فصل نامه جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی شهری چشم انداز زاگرس، (49)13، 7-40. https://sanad.iau.ir/Journal/zagros/Article/937789]
55. Setiadi A H, Syah A A M. Utilizing Metaverse Technology for the Preservation of Indigenous Houses in Southeast Sulawesi: A Study of Bajo, Tolaki, Muna, and Buton Cultural Heritage. JACEE (Journal of Advanced Civil and Environmental Engineering), 7(1), 98-108. https://jurnal.unissula.ac.id/index.php/JACEE/article/view/37024 [DOI:10.30659/jacee.7.1.98-108]
56. Shojaei S, Alemi B, Jeyhani H R. (1400). Protection of urban values of historical passages based on pathology of upper neighborhood passage in Naraq city. Economics and Urban Planning, 2(3), 134-146. doi: 10.22034/UE.2021.2.03.02 (In Persian)
57. [شجاعی، ش، عالمی، ب، جیحانی، ح ر. (1400). حفاظت از ارزشهای شهری گذرهای تاریخی با تکیهبر آسیبشناسی گذر محله بالا در شهر نراق. اقتصاد و برنامه ریزی شهری، 2(3)، 134-146. doi: 10.22034/UE.2021.2.03.02]
58. Sim J K, Xu K W, Jin Y, Lee Z Y, Teo Y J, Mohan P, Cai Y. (2024). Designing an Educational Metaverse: A Case Study of NTUniverse. Applied Sciences, 14(6), 2559. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/14/6/2559 [DOI:10.3390/app14062559]
59. Sipahioglu N, KOC M K. THE VIRTUAL WAYS OF SETTLING DOWN: REINTERPRETING THE TRANSFORMATION OF SPACE IN METAVERSE. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nur-Sipahioglu-2/publication/377577342_THE_VIRTUAL_WAYS_OF_SETTLING_DOWN_REINTERPRETING_THE_TRANSFORMATION_OF_SPACE_IN_METAVERSE/links/65ae4fcf6c7ad06ab417ac3f/THE-VIRTUAL-WAYS-OF-SETTLING-DOWN-REINTERPRETING-THE-TRANSFORMATION-OF-SPACE-IN-METAVERSE.pdf
60. Slocombe M. (2015). La Sociedad para la Protección de Edificios Antiguos (SPAB). Loggia, Arquitectura & Restauración, (28), 46-51. https://polipapers.upv.es/index.php/loggia/article/view/3995 [DOI:10.4995/loggia.2015.3995]
61. Sohrabi-Moghaddam-Chafjiri I, Nejad-Demochali A. (1401). Investigating the role of artificial intelligence in the reconstruction of historical monuments in Iran. Journal of Islamic Culture and Art, 3(1), 106-92. https://www.jiac.ir/files/cd_papers/r_1_221229014612.pdf (In Persian)
62. [سهرابیمقدمچافجیری، ا، نژاددموچالی، ا. (1401). بررسی نقش هوش مصنوعی در بازسازی بناهای تاریخی ایران. جستارنامه فرهنگ و هنر اسلامی، 3(1)، 106-92. https://www.jiac.ir/files/cd_papers/r_1_221229014612.pdf]
63. Tang S K, Hou J H. (2022). Designing a framework for metaverse architecture. In Proceedings of the 27th CAADRIA Conference (Vol. 2, pp. 445-454). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/June-Hao-Hou/publication/362171315_Designing_a_Framework_for_Metaverse_Architecture/links/63513f3e6e0d367d91aedc6c/Designing-a-Framework-for-Metaverse-Architecture.pdf [DOI:10.52842/conf.caadria.2022.2.445]
64. Torkzaban S, Mohammad Moradi A. (2012). Architectural Design Criteria In Historical Fabrics. Journal of Architecture in Hot and Dry Climate, 1(1), 53-66. (In Persian)
65. ترک زبان، ش، مرادی، م. (1390). ضوابط طراحی معماری در بافت های تاریخی .معماری اقلیم گرم و خشک، 1(1)، 66-53.
66. Treccarichi Scavuzzo S. (2022). Immersive experience of ancient architectural heritage and related historical events-Reconstruction and visualization of the fire incident at the tomb of first Dynasty Egyptian Queen Meret-Neith in Abydos (Doctoral dissertation, Technische Universität Wien). https://repositum.tuwien.at/handle/20.500.12708/136286
67. Zhang X, Yang D, Yow C H, Huang L, Wu X, Huang X, Cai Y. (2022). Metaverse for cultural heritages. Electronics, 11(22), 3730. https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9292/11/22/3730 [DOI:10.3390/electronics11223730]
68. Zhang X, Zhi Y, Xu J, Han L. (2022). Digital protection and utilization of architectural heritage using knowledge visualization. Buildings, 12(10), 1604. https://www.mdpi.com/2075-5309/12/10/1604 [DOI:10.3390/buildings12101604]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |