Net-Centric Scholarly Discourse?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Net-Centric Scholarly Discourse?

on

  • 2,515 views

Future of Research Communication

Future of Research Communication
Perspectives Workshop, Schloss Dagstuhl, 15-18 August 2011
http://bit.ly/p8pRFD

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,515
Views on SlideShare
2,259
Embed Views
256

Actions

Likes
5
Downloads
27
Comments
1

5 Embeds 256

http://www.scoop.it 145
http://people.kmi.open.ac.uk 108
http://cloudworks.ac.uk 1
http://us-w1.rockmelt.com 1
https://twitter.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

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…
  • Thanks for sharing this, Simon! It would be lovely if the other Dagstuhl presentations were online as well.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Net-Centric Scholarly Discourse? Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Future of Research CommunicationPerspectives Workshop, Schloss Dagstuhl, 15-18 August 2011http://bit.ly/p8pRFDNet-Centric Scholarly Discourse?Simon Buckingham ShumKnowledge Media Institute, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UKhttp://people.kmi.open.ac.uk/sbstwitter @sbskmi 1
  • 2. “We may some day click off arguments ona machine with the same assurance that wenow enter sales on a cash register.”Vannevar Bush, 1945http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1945/07/as-we-may-think/3881 2
  • 3. Launch of ScholOnto project, 2001:the big question... 20xx?...§  In 2010, will we still be publishing scientific results primarily as prose papers, or will a complementary infrastructure emerge that exploits the power of the social, semantic web to model the literature as a network of claims and arguments? 3
  • 4. Questions the next generation scientificinfrastructure should help answer“What is the evidence for this claim?”“Was this prediction accurate?”“What are the conceptual foundations for this idea?”“Who’s built on this idea?”“Who’s challenged this idea, and using what kind of argument?”“Are there distinctive perspectives on this problem?”“Are there inconsistencies within this school of thought?” 4
  • 5. so we want tochange the system - so let’s think systems - Longer version in a talk at PARC: http://olnet.org/node/582 5
  • 6. 1665 throws a long shadow Beyond richly expressive, but To network-native, computationally passive, prose documents... tractable models and services… Le Journal des Sçavans Philosophical Transactions Chaomei Chen, 2006: January 1665 of the Royal Society of Citation network visualization London, March 1665Buckingham Shum, S. (2007). Digital Research Discourse? Computational Thinking Seminar Series, School of Informatics, 6University of Edinburgh, 25 Apr. 2007. http://kmi.open.ac.uk/projects/hyperdiscourse/docs/Simon-Edin-CompThink.pdf
  • 7. A community of enquiry – inc. but notltd to scientists – is a complex adaptivesystem 7
  • 8. A community of enquiry – inc. but notltd to scientists – is a complex adaptivesystem 8
  • 9. A community of enquiry – inc. but notltd to scientists – is a complex adaptivesystem 9
  • 10. How do we augment this system’s capacity tosense, respond to, and shape itsenvironment?§  Through the lens of complex adaptive systems, resilience and network science...§  Through the lens of sensemaking and HCI... 10
  • 11. How do we augment this system’s capacity tosense, respond to, and shape itsenvironment?§  Through the lens of complex adaptive systems, resilience and network science... §  many interacting agents (human and software) §  many weak signals that can build up unexpectedly §  diversity and redundancy §  feedback loops §  visual analytics to reveal emergent patterns and network properties §  ability to withstand change and shock to the system 11
  • 12. Resilience§  Walker, et al. (2004) define resilience as“the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance and reorganize while undergoing change, so as to still retain essentially the same function, structure, identity, and feedbacks” 12
  • 13. Resilience in knowledge-intensiveecosystems When knowledge and understanding are key variables in the system, resilience depends on the capacity for learninge.g. awareness of discrepant evidence,critical practice, reflection and dialoguewhen confronted by challenges or shocksto the system. 13
  • 14. How do we augment this system’s capacity tosense, respond to, and shape itsenvironment?§  Through the lens of sensemaking and HCI... §  many plausible narratives: what was, is, or might be going on?... • cri tical t §  many representational artifacts • arg hinkin being shared and annotated ument g • rhe ation §  attention to the quality of torica conversation: how well are • ass l mov agents listening to each other umpti es and what kinds of contributions • ana ons logica do they make? • ca u l thin §  informal interaction mixed with sality king • jux stronger public claims taposi §  many connections being made, • “ki tions nda r both explicit/implicit, formal and elated fuzzy ...” 14
  • 15. Sensemaking: the search for plausible,narrative connections§  In their review of sensemaking, Klein, et al. conclude: §  “Sensemaking is a motivated, continuous effort to understand connections (which can be among people, places, and events) in order to anticipate their trajectories and act effectively.” 15
  • 16. SensemakingKarl Weick:§  “Sensemaking is about such things as placement of items into frameworks, comprehending, redressing surprise, constructing meaning, interacting in pursuit of mutual understanding, and patterning.” (Weick, [23], p.6) 16
  • 17. SensemakingKarl Weick:§  “The point we want to make here is that sensemaking is about plausibility, coherence, and reasonableness. Sensemaking is about accounts that are socially acceptable and credible” ([23] p.61) 17
  • 18. (contested) collective intelligence...discourse is how we construct meaning there is no master worldview we need CI infrastructures to poolawareness of how people are reading the signals, and amplify important connections 18
  • 19. Where our tools fit… Given a wealth ofdocuments… 19
  • 20. ...and tools to detect and render potentiallysignificant patterns… 20
  • 21. ...and tools to detect and render potentiallysignificant patterns… 21
  • 22. ...we need ways to make meaningfulconnections between informationelements… 22
  • 23. ...we need ways to make meaningfulconnections between informationelements… interpretation interpretation interpretation interpretation 23
  • 24. ...we need ways to make meaningfulconnections between informationelements… interpretation interpretation interpretation(a hunch – no grounding evidence yet) interpretation interpretation interpretation 24
  • 25. ...we need ways to make meaningfulconnections between informationelements… interpretation Is pre-requisite for interpretation interpretation(a hunch – no grounding evidence yet) causes predicts interpretation interpretation interpretation 25
  • 26. ...we need ways to make meaningfulconnections between informationelements… interpretation Is pre-requisite for prevents interpretation interpretation(a hunch – no grounding Is inconsistent with evidence yet) causes predicts challenges interpretation interpretation interpretation 26
  • 27. ...we need ways to make meaningfulconnections between informationelements… Question responds to motivates Answer Assumption supports challenges Supporting Challenging Argument… Argument… 27
  • 28. ...we need ways to make meaningfulconnections between informationelements… Question responds to motivates Answer Hunch supports challenges Supporting Challenging Argument… Argument… 28
  • 29. ...we need ways to make meaningfulconnections between informationelements… Question responds to motivates Answer Data supports challenges Supporting Challenging Argument… Argument… 29
  • 30. empirical studiesof users motivate user interface concepts 30
  • 31. Interaction design for literature visualization: pilot study: paper-based literature modellingBuckingham Shum, S.J., Uren, V., Li, G., Sereno, B. and Mancini, C. (2007). Modelling Naturalistic Argumentation in ResearchLiteratures: Representation and Interaction Design Issues. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, (Special Issue on 31Computational Models of Natural Argument, Eds: C. Reed and F. Grasso, 22, (1), pp.17-47. ePrint: http://oro.open.ac.uk/6463
  • 32. Interaction design for lit. visualization From paper prototype to semiformal mapping tool §  The ClaiMapper tool Starting from paper-based modelling, move from literature sketches… …to formal argument mapsBuckingham Shum, S.J., Uren, V., Li, G., Sereno, B. and Mancini, C. (2007). Modelling Naturalistic Argumentation in ResearchLiteratures: Representation and Interaction Design Issues. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, (Special Issue on 32Computational Models of Natural Argument, Eds: C. Reed and F. Grasso, 22, (1), pp.17-47. ePrint: http://oro.open.ac.uk/6463
  • 33. Interaction design for doc. annotation Pilot study: paper-based annotationPilot study reported in: B. Sereno, S. Buckingham Shum, and E. Motta. (2005). ClaimSpotter: an Environment to Support 33Sensemaking with Knowledge Triples. Proc. Int. Conf. Intelligent User Interfaces, pages 199–206, ACM
  • 34. The ClaimSpotter annotation tool§  Web 2.0-style tagging with optional community/system tag recommendations Sereno, B., Buckingham Shum, S. and Motta, E. (2007). Formalization, User Strategy and Interaction Design: Users’ Behaviour with Discourse Tagging Semantics. Workshop on Social and Collaborative Construction 34 of Structured Knowledge, 16th Int. World Wide Web Conference, Banff, Canada; 8-12 May 2007.
  • 35. baby examples 35
  • 36. A scholarly hypertext wins Best PaperAward at ACM Hypertext 2004! 36
  • 37. Mapping a nuclear power debate on a blog
  • 38. Mapping a nuclear power debate on a blog
  • 39. Mapping a nuclear power debate on a blog
  • 40. from small single-user hypertext maps to collaborative web infrastructure? 40
  • 41. Growing number of tools for structureddeliberation and mapping argumentsOnline Deliberation: Emerging Tools WorkshopOnline Deliberation 2010, Leeds UKwww.olnet.org/odet2010ESSENCE: E-Science, Sensemaking & Climate ChangeESSENCE 2009 workshop, KMI, Open Universityhttp://events.kmi.open.ac.uk/essence 41
  • 42. example services demos later... 42
  • 43. Cohere visualization of semantic annotations on publications‘Learner autonomy emerging as a hub node in the literature analysis... “‘Learner autonomy’ represents a variety of overlapping and effective learning practices, and implies the learner can give meaning to learning and create new learning tools” Webcast and Cohere demo: Mapping the Deeper Learning Literature with Cohere: Helen Jelfs, Simon Buckingham Shum, Anna De Liddo, Open University Seminar: http://cloudworks.ac.uk/cloud/view/5618 43
  • 44. ClaiMaker: a concept demonstrator (2004)Modelling the philosophy of AI Turing debate Buckingham Shum, S.J., Uren, V., Li, G., Sereno, B. and Mancini, C. (2007). Modelling Naturalistic Argumentation in Research Literatures: Representation and Interaction Design Issues. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, (Special Issue on 8.15 Computational Models of Natural Argument, Eds: C. Reed and F. Grasso, 22, (1), pp.17-47. ePrint: http://oro.open.ac.uk/6463
  • 45. New forms of “Impact Analytics”? Tracking the kinds of contributions a researcher makes, e.g. acting as a broker, connecting the ideas of peers or separate communitiesDe Liddo, A., Buckingham Shum, S., Quinto, I., Bachler, M. and Cannavacciuolo, L.(2011). Discourse-Centric LearningAnalytics. Proc. 1st Int. Conf. Learning Analytics & Knowledge. Feb. 27-Mar 1, 2011, Banff. http://oro.open.ac.uk/25829
  • 46. “What is the lineage of this idea?” Buckingham Shum, S.J., Uren, V., Li, G., Sereno, B. and Mancini, C. (2007). Modelling Naturalistic Argumentation in Research Literatures: Representation and Interaction Design Issues. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, (Special Issue on Computational Models of Natural Argument, Eds: C. Reed and F. 46 Grasso, 22, (1), pp.17-47. ePrint: http://oro.open.ac.uk/6463
  • 47. OpenEd Evidence Hub: ci.olnet.org 47
  • 48. OpenEd Evidence Hub: ci.olnet.org 48
  • 49. Phone alert: the weight of challengingevidence on Issue X has grown...http://debategraph.org/details.aspx?nid=113433&lan=EN&nf=1 49
  • 50. — web annotation of OER (Firefoxextension)
  • 51. Human+machine discourse annotation(work with Ágnes Sándor, Xerox) Ágnes Sándor & OLnet Project: 51 http://olnet.org/node/512
  • 52. Discourse analysis with Xerox Incremental ParserDetection of salient sentences based on rhetorical markers:BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE: NOVELTY: OPEN QUESTION:Recent studies indicate … ... new insights provide direct … little is known … evidence ... … role … has been elusive… the previously proposed … ... we suggest a new ... approach ...Current data is insufficient …… is universally accepted ... ... results define a novel role ...CONRASTING IDEAS: SIGNIFICANCE: SUMMARIZING:… unorthodox view resolves … studies ... have provided The goal of this study ...paradoxes … important advances Here, we show ...In contrast with previous Knowledge ... is crucial for ... Altogether, our results ...hypotheses ... understanding indicate... inconsistent with past valuable information ... fromfindings ... studiesGENERALIZING: SURPRISE:... emerging as a promising We have recently observed ...approach surprisinglyOur understanding ... has grown We have identified ... unusual Ágnes Sándor & OLnet Project: http://olnet.org/node/512exponentially ... The recent discovery ... suggests... growing recognition of the intriguing rolesimportance ...
  • 53. Distributed annotation platforms(Cohere+Utopia PDF demo: thanks to Steve Pettifer, U. Manchester) 53
  • 54. A community of enquiry – inc. but notltd to scientists – is a complex adaptivesystem 54
  • 55. Envisioning the shifts that will takeplace... 55
  • 56. http://projects.kmi.open.ac.uk/hyperdiscourse Compendium Institute 56