• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Arguing on Issues with Mathematical Knowledge Items in a Semantic Wiki
 

Arguing on Issues with Mathematical Knowledge Items in a Semantic Wiki

on

  • 775 views

LWA 2008, Workshop Knowledge Management (FGWM)

LWA 2008, Workshop Knowledge Management (FGWM)

Statistics

Views

Total Views
775
Views on SlideShare
775
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
7
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Arguing on Issues with Mathematical Knowledge Items in a Semantic Wiki Arguing on Issues with Mathematical Knowledge Items in a Semantic Wiki Presentation Transcript

    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Arguing on Issues with Mathematical Knowledge Items in a Semantic Wiki LWA/FGWM 2008 Christoph Lange, Tuukka Hastrup, Stéphane Corlosquet Jacobs University, Bremen, Germany KWARC – Knowledge Adaptation and Reasoning for Content Digital Enterprise Research Institute, National University of Ireland, Galway This work was supported by JEM-Thematic-Network ECP-038208. October 7, 2008 Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 1
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Resource Edit Discussion History Issue Anna 2008–05–30 [Idea][Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] It’s hard to find out how to improve content (= resources) in wikis Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 2
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Resource Edit Discussion History Issue Anna 2008–05–30 [Idea][Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] It’s hard to find out how to improve content (= resources) in wikis Agree Bert 2008–05–31 Indeed, besides automated approaches it’s hard to get focused feedback from users. Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 2
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Resource Edit Discussion History Issue Anna 2008–05–30 [Idea][Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] It’s hard to find out how to improve content (= resources) in wikis Agree Bert 2008–05–31 Indeed, besides automated approaches it’s hard to get focused feedback from users. Idea Carl 2008–06–01 [Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] So let’s make wiki discussions semantic! Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 2
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Resource Edit Discussion History Issue Anna 2008–05–30 [Idea][Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] It’s hard to find out how to improve content (= resources) in wikis Agree Bert 2008–05–31 Indeed, besides automated approaches it’s hard to get focused feedback from users. Idea Carl 2008–06–01 [Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] So let’s make wiki discussions semantic! Argument Doro 2008–06–02 [Agree][Disagree] We could take types from an argumentation ontology for the posts. Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 2
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Resource Edit Discussion History Issue Anna 2008–05–30 [Idea][Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] It’s hard to find out how to improve content (= resources) in wikis Agree Bert 2008–05–31 Indeed, besides automated approaches it’s hard to get focused feedback from users. Idea Carl 2008–06–01 [Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] So let’s make wiki discussions semantic! Argument Doro 2008–06–02 [Agree][Disagree] We could take types from an argumentation ontology for the posts. Argument Erwin 2008–06–03 [Agree][Disagree] And every discourse should be connected to resources corresponding to the wiki page, and there should be domain-specific Idea and Issue subclasses. Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 2
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Resource Edit Discussion History Issue Anna 2008–05–30 [Idea][Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] It’s hard to find out how to improve content (= resources) in wikis Agree Bert 2008–05–31 Indeed, besides automated approaches it’s hard to get focused feedback from users. Idea Carl 2008–06–01 [Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] So let’s make wiki discussions semantic! Argument Doro 2008–06–02 [Agree][Disagree] We could take types from an argumentation ontology for the posts. Argument Erwin 2008–06–03 [Agree][Disagree] And every discourse should be connected to resources corresponding to the wiki page, and there should be domain-specific Idea and Issue subclasses. Agree Anonymous 2008–06–04 That’s great, then the wiki could assist with the realisation of an approved idea. And old decisions would be documented. Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 2
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Resource Edit Discussion History Issue Anna 2008–05–30 [Idea][Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] It’s hard to find out how to improve content (= resources) in wikis Agree Bert 2008–05–31 Indeed, besides automated approaches it’s hard to get focused feedback from users. Idea Carl 2008–06–01 [Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] So let’s make wiki discussions semantic! Argument Doro 2008–06–02 [Agree][Disagree] We could take types from an argumentation ontology for the posts. Argument Erwin 2008–06–03 [Agree][Disagree] And every discourse should be connected to resources corresponding to the wiki page, and there should be domain-specific Idea and Issue subclasses. Agree Anonymous 2008–06–04 That’s great, then the wiki could assist with the realisation of an approved idea. And old decisions would be documented. Decision Christoph 2008–06–05 So let’s do it! (Available in the semantic wiki IkeWiki, domain-specific extension for mathematics in SWiM presented here) Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 2
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Resource Edit Discussion History Issue Anna 2008–05–30 [Idea][Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] It’s hard to find out how to improve content (= resources) in wikis Agree Bert 2008–05–31 Indeed, besides automated approaches it’s hard to get focused feedback from users. Idea Carl 2008–06–01 [Argument][Agree][Disagree][Decision] So let’s make wiki discussions semantic! Argument Doro 2008–06–02 [Agree][Disagree] We could take types from an argumentation ontology for the posts. Argument Erwin 2008–06–03 [Agree][Disagree] And every discourse should be connected to resources corresponding to the wiki page, and there should be domain-specific Idea and Issue subclasses. Agree Anonymous 2008–06–04 That’s great, then the wiki could assist with the realisation of an approved idea. And old decisions would be documented. Decision Christoph 2008–06–05 So let’s do it! (Available in the semantic wiki IkeWiki, domain-specific extension for mathematics in SWiM presented here) Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 2
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Issues with Knowledge Items Terms used in this talk: Knowledge Item: A piece of knowledge about a distinct subject of interest Issue: Any problem by which a knowledge item could be affected Example A Wikipedia article is not written from a neutral point of view A mathematical theorem is hard to understand or wrong Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 3
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Resolving Issues 1 Report: What is affected by what issue 2 Propose a solution 3 Argue about the solution 4 Vote on the solution or on the arguments 5 Take a decision 6 Implement the decision Benefit Afterwards, anybody can retrace these steps. Argumentations are part of the collective experience of the community. Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 4
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Solving Issues in Wikipedia (1) Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 5
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Solving Issues in Wikipedia (1) {{Neutralität}} ’’’Würzburg’’’ ist ein trostloses Nest in [[Unterfranken]], wo weder das Bier noch der Wein schmeckt. Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 5
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Solving Issues in Wikipedia (2) Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 6
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Solving Issues in Wikipedia (2) Das ist ja wohl eine sehr verkürzte Betrachtung. --[[Benutzer:Alfred|Alfred]] 13:41, 27. Aug. 2008 (CEST) :Stimmt. Sollte man nicht noch was zum Weltkulturerbe schreiben? --[[Benutzer:Bernd|Bernd]] 13:47, 27. Aug. 2008 (CEST) ::Bin ich sehr dafür. --~~~~ Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 6
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Solving Issues in Wikipedia (3) Does that work? – Sufficiently, because: Quote [Brändle] Zu wenige Köche verderben den Brei Wikipedia has a large user base . . . and deals with topics of general interest Our system does neither! Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 7
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Semantic Wikis Generally: wikis that employ semantic web technologies like RDF or ontologies Most commonly: 1 article = 1 knowledge item Articles and links have types (taken from ontologies) Applications In Würzburg: Problem solving using expert knowledge (KnowWE) In Karlsruhe: Semantic MediaWiki Semantic Wikipedia Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 8
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Semantic Discussions SIOC (Semantically Interlinked Online Communities) ontology for user-generated content, particularly online discussions applied in forums, blogs, content management systems, . . . . . . and in one (!) semantic wiki – which ours is based on Did you know? Discussions in semantic wikis are rarely semantic Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 9
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Wicked Problems Warning Issues can be wicked problems A wicked problem does not allow for a definitive formulation has solutions that are not true-or-false but good-or-bad There is no immediate and ultimate test of a solution IBIS: model for structured argumentation about wicked problems Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 10
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Argumentation Ontologies DILIGENT: IBIS applied to ontology engineering DILIGENT workflow 1 Issue (“some concept is not covered by our ontology”, “some requirement is not satisfied”) 2 Idea (how to conceptualise/formalise it) 3 Arguments challenge or justify ideas 4 Positions: opinions/votes on ideas 5 Decision: points to Issue, Idea, and supporting votes Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 11
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Domain-Specific Argumentation Ontology Agree Disagree DILIGENT argumentation …… ontology subClassOf Theorem Example Position subClassOf Domain-specific positionOn positionOn argumentation classes (partly shown) Math. Know- withPositions ledge Item OMDoc ontology subClassOf Ontology Decision Entity onIssue onIdea resolvesInto Issue Idea responseTo subClassOf subClassOf Wrong Inappropriate Incomprehensible Provide Keep as Delete for Domain Example Bad Example Applicable Issue/Idea types depend on type of knowledge item Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 12
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Issues in Mathematics 50 participants, experienced in mathematical knowledge management Survey is still open: http://tinyurl.com/5qdetd Common granularities of knowledge: course unit, mathematical theory, mathematical statement Little software support for issue tracking and solving known Knowledge item type most frequently affected by issues: definitions Common issues: wrong, incomprehensible, truth uncertain, underspecified, redundant Common solutions: directly improve affected knowledge item, split it Issues remain unresolved due to insufficient restructuring support Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 13
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Automated Assistance 1 Find legitimate issues not yet decided, more agreement than disagreement 2 Find best solution proposal (idea) highest agreement/disagreement ratio 3 Assist with implementation system knows common idea and issue types Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 14
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Implementation SWiM (Semantic Wiki for Mathematical Knowledge Management) one page holds one mathematical statement DILIGENT SIOC Argumentation Module (work in progress) SPARQL queries for finding the winning ideas Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 15
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Structure of a Use Case hasDiscussion forum1 theorem (IkeWiki ontology) has_container exemplifies post1: Issue (Incomprehensible) example responseTo has_reply resolvesInto post2: Idea (ProvideExample) positionOn knowledge post3: Agree items (OMDoc ontology) onIdea on wiki pages post4: Disagree post5: Agree onIssue withPositions post6: Decision argumentative physical structure structure (SIOC) discussion page (DILIGENT) Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 16
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Structure of a Use Case hasDiscussion forum1 theorem (IkeWiki ontology) has_container exemplifies post1: Issue (Incomprehensible) example responseTo has_reply resolvesInto post2: Idea (ProvideExample) positionOn knowledge post3: Agree items (OMDoc ontology) onIdea on wiki pages post4: Disagree post5: Agree onIssue withPositions post6: Decision argumentative physical structure structure (SIOC) discussion page (DILIGENT) Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 16
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Demo (1) Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 17
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Demo (2) Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 18
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Demo (3) Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 19
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Critical Questions Coverage of the model: No arguments so far (will make it harder to find the winning idea) Structure required: Knowledge items already need to have types (but DILIGENT-like approach to conceptualising/formalising from scratch would be possible) Wicked problems? Standard problems with standard solutions are not really wicked. But we give the user enough freedom to discuss non-standard problems as well. Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 20
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion OpenMath Case Study OpenMath Content Dictionary Wiki: http://wiki.openmath.org small group of knowledge engineers adding and revising semiformal definitions of math. symbols intensive discussions, formerly on a mailing list Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 21
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Practical Evaluation Idea: Given: a knowledge base where we intentionally break some knowledge items Task: fix it! One group has argumentation feature enabled The other group doesn’t Find out which group is more effective Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 22
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Related Work Foucault@Wiki: How to edit summaries and discussion posts relate to changes made to Wikipedia articles? Lekapidia: developing a new ontology with a DILIGENT-based wiki: detect inconsistent arguments, foster consensus Cicero: Arguing and voting on problem solutions using Semantic MediaWiki Collaborative Protégé: collaborative ontology editor Drupal: Versatile Content Management System, could port our implementation there panta rhei: interactive and collaborative reader for mathematical documents; discussion forums and ratings Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 23
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Summary Knowledge bases need structured discussions for better problem solving and documentation We have integrated an argumentation ontology into a semantic wiki . . . offering domain-specific extensions and assistance Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 24
    • Introduction Motivation Foundations Approach Implementation Evaluation Related Conclusion Scale it to the web Users can have accounts on multiple social media sites SIOC allows for modeling this There are crawlers and indexers for RDF data on the web ⇒ we can find about arguments and actions of the same user on other sites . . . and use it for the purpose of our own site Example A user on site A proposes lots of solutions to issues which get positive feedback and are then implemented ⇒ This is a competent user! Site B, dealing with a related topic, might be interested in him. Lange/Hastrup/Corlosquet (Jacobs U./DERI) Arguing on Issues with Math. Knowledge Items in a Wiki October 7, 2008 25