Found some references on GeoNotes:

– Petra Fagerberg, Fredrik Espinoza, and Per Persson. (2003) What is a place? Allowing users to name and defi ne places, In CHI ‘03 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA, pp. 828 – 829, ACM Press, New York, NY, USA.

– Per Persson and Petra Fagerberg. (2002) GeoNotes: a real-use study of a public locationaware community system. Technical report, (T2002:27), Stockholm, SICS.

– Persson, P., Espinoza, F., Fagerberg, P., Sandin, A. & Cöster, R. (2002) GeoNotes:A Location-based Information System for Public Spaces, in Kristina Höök, David Benyon and Alan Munro (eds), Readings in Social Navigation of Information Space, pp. 151-173, Springer Verlag.

Nice link from Pierre, to this lab in Sweden that is working on Mobile applications a location based services. It is a collaboration between the Swedish Institute of Computer Sciences and Viktoria Instituet:

We aim to develop innovative mobile services and the corresponding supporting technology and platforms. Our research method involves moving beyond the creation of individual services and form general design approaches, methods, and middleware . Initially, we focus on five such general design approaches: how to exploit affect in mobile settings, how to create social mobile services, how to exploit mobility in entertainment services, how to improve mobile services through multimodal interfaces, and how to support collaboration through articulation of mobile activities.

Taking a walk on the internet I found this interesting project for Collaborative sketching. It is a kind of game where you have to draw something and the others can answer. What I still have to understand is how the matching word is recognized in the chat window. Nice to have a look though.

Copyright notice: the present content was taken from the following URL, the copyrights is reserved by the respective author/s.

From a brainstorming about the paper for CSCL2005 some research points emerged:
– False grounding is an interesting concept: if we want to support collaboration, then our computational model should support false grounding;
– We can integrate Pierre’s 4-level model about grounding adding an extra level which is commitment.
– belief is not a general truth it may be the impression that the agent has of the evidence e.

Just back from Patrick’s thesis presentation rehearsal.
Some notes:
– methods to enforce individual participation; the coaching / regulation intervene at interaction level during real time activity.
– regulation is like a thermostat;
– It is not the computer that should be intelligent (Scardamalia)
– statistic of the first experiment was used to set metacognitive tools of the second;
– interaction meters influence behavior.

Google Scholar enables you to search specifically for scholarly literature, including peer-reviewed papers, theses, books, preprints, abstracts and technical reports from all broad areas of research. Use Google Scholar to find articles from a wide variety of academic publishers, professional societies, preprint repositories and universities, as well as scholarly articles available across the web.

Copyright notice: the present content was taken from the following URL, the copyrights is reserved by the respective author/s.

After messing around on the net to find some good links, I decided to drop it there and ask the BibDesk community. Interestingly, it was an open topic but fortunately James gave me the right link. He realised a url’ized version of the apalike.bst. I attach it here for your references (I hope is okay James). I also add some instructions on how to hack the file in the extended part (contributions of James and Claus, from the mailing list).

[apalike-url.bst]
Continue reading →

[Radford] Radford, C. An essay of belief and acceptance. -book review.
————–

This review focus on the core ideas of Cohen book about “Belief and Acceptance”, where Cohen claims that belief is passive, acceptance voluntary. So we are not directly responsible for what we believe. People may be confused, inconsistent, irrational, inchoate, when asked to formalise their beliefs. Acceptance is active because is a mental act, a decision taken by the holder, to adopt certain premises or rules of inference as a base for further reasoning or action.

[DiEugenio et al.2000] DiEugenio, B., Jordan, P. W., Thomason, R. H., and Moore, J. D. (2000). The agreement process: an empirical investigation of human-human computer-mediated collaborative dialogues. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, pages 1–57.
—————-

The main contribution of the work is the definition of a framwork which combines the IRMA framework for rational problem solving (Bratman, Israel and Pollack, 1988) with Clark’s work on language as a collaborative activity (1992, 1996). To the authors, what is missing in IRMA is an explicit link to collaboration, particularly in dialogue. IRMA cannot explain how negotiation unfolds in a dialogue, how conversant come to agree on a certain solution. Clark’s contribution model seems, for them, to bridging the gap, as it explains how the mutual belief needed for an agreement can be reached.

Mainly, in their studies they try to set the framework to be able to recognise the function of each utterance within the agremment process. In their adaptation of the contribution model, a proposals correspond to situations where an agent can deliberate to the point of making a commitment. Therefore in the light of their corpus study they conclude that the notion of commitment (Cohen and Leversque 1990, Bratman 1992) is more useful than that of acceptance / rejection in order to model the agreement process. This is because tracing how commitment changes with respect of certain proposal, they account for how negotiation unfolds over several turns, so to overcome the problem of recognising implicit or passive acceptances.

This exend on my idea that we have to look for tangible signs of the grounding process instead of referring to beliefs that are hidden and difficult to trace.

In their work they used the COCONUT environment, claiming that the basic agreement process is not affected by the particular modality of the dialogue.

Friday was Diwali day, or Deepavali, the beginning of the Indù year. I know I am a bit late but better late than never …

[more]