## 2 Methods
### User Experience Evaluation  
The user experience evaluation aimed to explore some aspects of the mobile application's usability, which integrated the new CA towards support of PwPD. The study was conducted in a controlled environment, following a well-defined test guide with scripted interactions provided to both the test conductor and the observer. This guide ensured consistency and standardized data collection throughout all sessions.  
The evaluation began with an introduction to the mobile application, during which participants were guided on how to use the app and encouraged to explore its features. Participants then entered a structured scripting phase, where the test conductor remained uninvolved, intervening only in cases of confusion or difficulty. After completing the scripted tasks, participants were asked to finish the remaining sections of the feedback survey.  
A designated observer closely monitored participants' interactions with the chatbot throughout the testing process, noting both verbal and nonverbal cues. These observations were recorded in a separate survey designed to compare participants' feedback responses with their observable behaviors.  
Following the testing phase, participants completed a user satisfaction questionnaire comprising 12 closed-ended questions (statements) rated on a five-point Likert scale. The survey aimed to assess the experience of using the mobile app with the integrated CA, across the following dimensions, following the uMARS questionnaire proposed by [PERSON] et al. [46]: (i) Functionality (performance, ease of use, navigation, and gestural design), (ii) Aesthetics (visual appeal, graphics, and layout), (iii) Information Quality (accuracy, credibility, quantity, and relevance of the information), and (iv) Subjective Quality (motivation for repeated use, overall satisfaction, and likelihood of recommendation). It was decided not to use the full uMARS questionnaire at this study stage, as its length could cause fatigue in PwPD participants, many of whom tire quickly.  
Participants were selected according to specific criteria based on the following [7; 8; 9]:  
* **Inclusion criteria**.
* People who are at least eighteen years old and have been diagnosed with PD.
* PwPD who understand the purpose of the study, who can commit to the required tasks and can fill out a consent form.
* **Exclusion criteria**.
* PwPD with severe vision or hearing impairments.
* PwPD with other neurological, respiratory, or orthopedic conditions significantly impairing their ability to complete tasks safely.
* PwPD with severe neuropsychiatric symptoms, such as major depression.
* PwPD with severe cognitive or physical impairment (Level 5 on the Hoehn and Yahr Scale (H and Y) [47]) interfering with study participation.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l} \hline \hline
**Characteristic** & **Metric (Number of)** \\ \hline \multirow{7}{*}{Domain Coverage} & Exercise names correctly identified \\  & Exercise stages correctly identified \\  & Repetitions correctly identified \\  & Sets correctly identified \\  & Exercise descriptions correctly identified \\  & Motivation asserts correctly performed \\ \hline Coherence Response Capacity & Coherent responses \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Dialog Management Capacity} & Conversations chained correctly \\  & Well-being fallback correctly recovered \\ \cline{1-1}  & Non-understandable inputs correctly detected \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Technical Performance Evaluation plan.  
PwPD with clinical instability in the past six months, such as a recent stroke or acute myocardial infarction, or other health conditions of similar severity.
* PwPD with instability in PD medication or deep brain stimulation within the last three months.  
Additionally, participants completed a socio-demographic background questionnaire, including physical activity and exercise levels, details on technology use in daily living, and clinical data. PD staging was reported according to the H and Y.