Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

ASEE2011 Presentation: Social Tagging

413 views

Published on

This is a presentation at ASEE2011, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

ASEE2011 Presentation: Social Tagging

  1. 1. Weighted Social Tagging as a Research Methodology to Determine Systemic Trends in Engineering Education Research Xin Chen, Nikitha Sambamurthy, Corey Schimpf, Hanjun Xian, Krishna Madhavan {chen654, snikitha, cschimpf, hxian, cm}@purdue.edu
  2. 2. 1 Motivation 2 Methodology 3 Data Analysis and Results 4 Future Work
  3. 3. 1 Motivation 2 Methodology 3 Data Analysis and Results 4 Future Work
  4. 4. Motivation Trends & Core Topics of EER Analyze Literature, e. g. JEE Paper review by a domain expert
  5. 5. Motivation Wankat (1999)
  6. 6. Motivation Wankat (2004)
  7. 7. Motivation Trends & Core Topics of EER Analyze Literature, e. g. JEE Paper review by a domain expert Machine analysis based on word count
  8. 8. Motivation Kim, Ko, Elmqvist, & Ebert (2011)
  9. 9. Motivation Viégas, Wattenberg, & Feinberg (2009)
  10. 10. Motivation
  11. 11. Motivation
  12. 12. Motivation However see use many get terms may large agreed using
  13. 13. Motivation Pomales-Garcia & Liu (2007) Friesen, Taylor & Britton (2005) Brophy, Klein, Portsmore & Rogers (2008)
  14. 14. Motivation Pomales-Garcia & Liu (2007)
  15. 15. Motivation
  16. 16. Motivation 1 Friesen, Taylor & Britton (2005)
  17. 17. Motivation 1
  18. 18. Motivation 1 2 Brophy, Klein, Portsmore & Rogers (2008)
  19. 19. Motivation 1 2
  20. 20. Motivation 1 2 3
  21. 21. Motivation 1 2 3
  22. 22. Motivation 1 2 3
  23. 23. Motivation Problem Solving Spectrum
  24. 24. Motivation Problem Solving Spectrum
  25. 25. Motivation Problem Solving Spectrum Social tagging harnesses the power of collective human intelligence. Human intelligence tasks that computers are unable to do.
  26. 26. Motivation Problem Solving Spectrum “19th century culture was defined by the novel, 20th century culture by cinema, the culture of the 21st century will be defined by the interface. ” -- Quoted by Aaron Koblin in the TED talk: Artfully Visualizing Our Humanity
  27. 27. Motivation EER community Our goal is to build an interactive data mining and visualization interface for EER community.
  28. 28. Motivation Weighted Social Tagging Weight Confidence Rating Tagger Document Tag Our very first attempt to introduce human insight and precision into the analysis of systemic trends.
  29. 29. 1 Motivation 2 Methodology 3 Data Analysis and Results 4 Future Work
  30. 30. 1 Motivation 2 Methodology 3 Data Analysis and Results 4 Future Work
  31. 31. Methodology Weighted Social Tagging Weight Confidence Rating Tagger Document Tag
  32. 32. Methodology Document Anthony et al. (2007) Tagger Tag Weight Confidence Rating
  33. 33. Methodology Document Tag Weight cross-disciplinary 10/100 Anthony et al. (2007) Tagger Confidence Rating 0.5 I’m 50% sure that cross-disciplinary weights 10 out of100 as a descriptive term for this paper.
  34. 34. Methodology Tag Weight Confidence Composite cross-disciplinary Methodology Anthony et al. (2007) Implication 0.5 5 teams 5 0.3 1.5 technology Background 10 20 0.5 10 mix-methods 15 0.7 10.5 statistics 15 0.7 10.5 implement 20 0.5 10 encourage 15 0.5 7.5
  35. 35. Methodology Tag Weight Confidence Composite cross-disciplinary Methodology Anthony et al. (2007) Implication 0.5 5 teams 5 0.3 1.5 technology Background 10 20 0.5 10 mix-methods 15 0.7 10.5 statistics 15 0.7 10.5 implement 20 0.5 10 encourage 15 0.5 7.5
  36. 36. Methodology Tag Weight Confidence Composite cross-disciplinary Methodology Anthony et al. (2007) Implication 0.5 5 teams 5 0.3 1.5 technology Background 10 20 0.5 10 mix-methods 15 0.7 10.5 statistics 15 0.7 10.5 implement 20 0.5 10 encourage 15 0.5 7.5
  37. 37. Methodology Tag Weight Confidence Composite cross-disciplinary Methodology Anthony et al. (2007) Implication 0.5 5 teams 5 0.3 1.5 technology Background 10 20 0.5 10 mix-methods 15 0.7 10.5 statistics 15 0.7 10.5 implement 20 0.5 10 encourage 15 0.5 7.5
  38. 38. Methodology Tag Weight Confidence Composite cross-disciplinary Methodology Anthony et al. (2007) Implication 0.5 5 teams 5 0.3 1.5 technology Background 10 20 0.5 10 mix-methods 15 0.7 10.5 statistics 15 0.7 10.5 implement 20 0.5 10 encourage 15 0.5 7.5 Sum=100
  39. 39. Methodology Tag Weight Confidence Composite cross-disciplinary Methodology Anthony et al. (2007) Implication 0.5 5 teams 5 0.3 1.5 technology Background 10 20 0.5 10 mix-methods 15 0.7 10.5 statistics 15 0.7 10.5 implement 20 0.5 10 encourage 15 0.5 7.5 Each rating ranges 0~1
  40. 40. Methodology Tag Weight Confidence Composite cross-disciplinary Methodology Anthony et al. (2007) Implication 0.5 5 teams 5 0.3 1.5 technology Background 10 20 0.5 10 mix-methods 15 0.7 10.5 statistics 15 0.7 10.5 implement 20 0.5 10 encourage 15 0.5 7.5 Weight x Confidence
  41. 41. Methodology 3 ENE graduate students 152 papers JEE 2005-2009
  42. 42. Methodology 3 ENE graduate students 152 papers JEE 2005-2009 3,456 tags each with a weight and a confidence rating
  43. 43. Methodology 3 ENE graduate students 152 papers JEE 2005-2009 3,456 tags each with a weight and a confidence rating Trends & core content
  44. 44. Methodology 3 ENE graduate students 152 papers JEE 2005-2009 3,456 tags each with a weight and a confidence rating Trends & core content Characteristics of the taggers Information Retrieval
  45. 45. 1 Motivation 2 Methodology 3 Data Analysis and Results 4 Future Work
  46. 46. 1 Motivation 2 Methodology 3 Data Analysis and Results 4 Future Work
  47. 47. Data Analysis and Results 3 Hypotheses Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get: H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias. H2 Better description of content of individual papers. H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  
  48. 48. Data Analysis and Results 3 Hypotheses Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get: H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias. H2 Better description of content of individual papers. H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  
  49. 49. Data Analysis and Results H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias. Composite Scores from Tagger A 20 High correlation, Narrow coverage 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 Composite Scores from Tagger B 20
  50. 50. Data Analysis and Results H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias. Composite Scores from Tagger A 20 Low correlation, Wide coverage 15 10 5 0 5 10 15 Composite Scores from Tagger B 20
  51. 51. Data Analysis and Results H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias. -0.2254 -0.0542 0.0581 -0.2105 weight confidence -0.1737 -0.0489 -0.0969 -0.0378 composite -0.2226
  52. 52. Data Analysis and Results 3 Hypotheses Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get: H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias. H2 Better description of content of individual papers. H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  
  53. 53. Data Analysis and Results 3 Hypotheses Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get: H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias. H2 Better description of content of individual papers. H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  
  54. 54. Data Analysis and Results H2 Better description of content of individual papers. Pomales-Garcia & Liu (2007)
  55. 55. Data Analysis and Results H2 Better description of content of individual papers. Word Frequency Counting Top 15 keywords Weighted Social Tagging students engineering education participants skills teaching questions student professors study excellence technology classroom more used interviews sex parity student view student involvement excellence ethnographic perspective perception discrepancies consensus institutions undergraduate participant activities qualitative research technology usage variables discursive
  56. 56. Data Analysis and Results H2 Better description of content of individual papers. Word Frequency Counting Top 15 keywords Weighted Social Tagging students engineering education participants skills teaching questions student professors study excellence excellence technology classroom more used interviews sex parity student view student involvement excellence excellence ethnographic perspective perception discrepancies consensus institutions undergraduate participant activities qualitative research technology usage variables discursive
  57. 57. Data Analysis and Results H2 Better description of content of individual papers. Word Frequency Counting Top 15 keywords Weighted Social Tagging students engineering education participants skills teaching questions student professors study excellence technology technology classroom more used interviews sex parity student view student involvement excellence ethnographic perspective perception discrepancies consensus institutions undergraduate participant activities qualitative research technology usage technology usage variables discursive
  58. 58. Data Analysis and Results H2 Better description of content of individual papers. Word Frequency Counting Top 15 keywords Weighted Social Tagging students engineering education participants participants skills teaching questions student professors study excellence technology classroom more used interviews sex parity student view student involvement excellence ethnographic perspective perception discrepancies consensus institutions undergraduate participant activities participants activities qualitative research technology usage variables discursive
  59. 59. Data Analysis and Results H2 Better description of content of individual papers. Word Frequency Counting Top 15 keywords Weighted Social Tagging students engineering education participants skills teaching questions student professors study excellence technology classroom more used interviews interviews sex parity sex parity student student view view student involvement student involvement excellence ethnographic perspective ethnographic perspective perception discrepancies consensus institutions undergraduate participant activities qualitative research technology usage variables discursive
  60. 60. Data Analysis and Results 3 Hypotheses Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get: H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias. H2 Better description of content of individual papers. H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  
  61. 61. Data Analysis and Results 3 Hypotheses Compared with word frequency counting, weighted social tagging method could get: H1 Wide coverage of meaning space with minimized bias. H2 Better description of content of individual papers. H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.  
  62. 62. Data Analysis and Results H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.   Top 20 Keywords 2005-2009 Word Frequency Counting Weighted Social Tagging
  63. 63. Data Analysis and Results H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.   Top 20 Keywords 2005-2009 Word Frequency Counting Weighted Social Tagging
  64. 64. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 engineering education learning students research student programs study journal design cooperative university faculty accreditation women college assessment work laboratory program engineering students education learning research project knowledge teaching university science journal student engineering students design education research university student engineering students education research design learning journal student engineering education students research learning ethics science journal women teaching career faculty development data study course process design educational faculty study history transfer information study journal learning problem work process science women faculty analysis experts participants knowledge science university program qualitative faculty analysis teaching study methods courses conceptual university student efficacy national participants
  65. 65. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 engineering engineering education learning students research student programs study journal design cooperative university faculty accreditation women college assessment work laboratory program engineering students education education learning research project knowledge teaching teaching university science journal student engineering students students design education research university student engineering students education research design learning learning journal student engineering education students research research learning ethics science journal women teaching career faculty development data study course process design educational faculty study history transfer information study journal learning problem work process Generic Terms science women faculty analysis experts participants knowledge science university ... program qualitative faculty analysis teaching study methods courses conceptual university student efficacy national participants
  66. 66. Data Analysis and Results H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.   Top 20 Keywords 2005-2009 Word Frequency Counting Weighted Social Tagging
  67. 67. Data Analysis and Results H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.   Top 20 Keywords 2005-2009 Word Frequency Counting Weighted Social Tagging
  68. 68. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  69. 69. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  70. 70. 2005 assessment assessment 2006 2007 2008 2009 simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  71. 71. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation 2005 2006 assessment 2007 2008 2009 cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  72. 72. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  73. 73. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  74. 74. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation 2005 2006 women 2007 2008 2009 cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  75. 75. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  76. 76. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  77. 77. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation 2005 2006 retention 2007 2008 2009 cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  78. 78. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  79. 79. 2005 2006 2007 2008 assessment simulation concept how people learn 2009 survey survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention survey survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  80. 80. 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 assessment simulation concept how people learn survey engagement retention knowledge concept discipline laboratory ethics teamwork active learning teamwork skill survey ethnography design women experiment model expert qualitative self-efficacy problem-based learning interactive model methodology gender historical knowledge essay meta-analysis engineering education collaboration class design First Year Engineering pedagogy faculty concept entrepreneurship satisfaction development concept women assessment retention survey behavioral complexity skills innovation cross-disciplinary research career creative experiment comparative cross-disciplinary interview self-directed learning active learning discourse assessment k-12 methodology online engineering culture engineering culture retention accessibility institution diversity feedback collaboration descriptive interaction individual future scenarios recruitment intention comparative semi-structured interview learning factory comparative bias industry women retention descriptive study organization t-test efficiency mechanism institutional difference curriculum attrition observation 2005 2006 survey 2007 2008 2009 cognitive psychology cross-profession training
  81. 81. Data Analysis and Results H3 Be#er  characteriza,on  of  trends  in  the  body  of  literature.   Composite Score 120 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 85 50 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Top 20 Tags Top ranking tags become less dominant indicates topics are expanding.
  82. 82. 1 Motivation 2 Methodology 3 Data Analysis and Results 4 Future Work
  83. 83. 1 Motivation 2 Methodology 3 Data Analysis and Results 4 Future Work
  84. 84. Future Work EER community
  85. 85. Future Work 1 Increase number and diversity of taggers EER community
  86. 86. Future Work 1 Increase number and diversity of taggers 2 Ease tagging process EER community
  87. 87. Future Work 1 Increase number and diversity of taggers 2 Ease tagging process 3 Further analyze trends from different angles EER community
  88. 88. Future Work 1 Increase number and diversity of taggers 2 Ease tagging process 3 Further analyze trends from different angles 4 Analyze characteristics of taggers EER community
  89. 89. Future Work 1 Increase number and diversity of taggers 2 Ease tagging process 3 Further analyze trends from different angles 4 Analyze characteristics of taggers 5 Build an interactive interface EER community
  90. 90. Questions ? Xin Chen, Nikitha Sambamurthy, Corey Schimpf, Hanjun Xian, Krishna Madhavan {chen654, snikitha, cschimpf, hxian, cm}@purdue.edu

×