AcaWiki - User contributions [en]

User:Jodi.a.schneider

2022-04-09T01:24:47Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{User
|name=Jodi Schneider
|photo=Jodi.jpg
|location=Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
|bio=I primarily used Acawiki for my Ph.D. in social/semantic web at DERI. Used to be the Community Liaison for AcaWiki
|blog=http://jodischneider.com/
|favorites=People Can Be So Fake: A New Dimension To Privacy And Technology Scholarship
|links=http://jodischneider.com/jodi.html
}}

==Cline/Media summaries==
* [[Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data]]

==In Progress==

* [[Persuasion in practical argument using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks]] (in progress)
* [[Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports]]

==Soon==
* [[Automatic argumentation detection and its role in law and the Semantic Web]]

==To review/improve==

* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
* [[Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]

==Summaries I mean to write:==
==Argumentation==

* [[A legal case OWL ontology with an instantiation of Popov v. Hayashi]]
* [[A speech act theory of metadiscourse]]
* [[An ontology in OWL for legal case-based reasoning]]

* K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. [[Justifying practical reasoning]]. In F. Grasso, C. Reed, and G. Carenini, editors, Proc. of the 4th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, pages 87-90, Valencia, Spain, 2004. http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~katie/cmna04.pdf
* Rudy Prabowo, Michael Thelwall, Iina Hellsten, and Andrea Scharnhorst. [[Evolving debate in online communication: A graph analytical approach]]. Internet Research, 18(5):520{540, 2008.
* Rudy Prabowo and Mike Thelwall. [[Finding and tracking subjects within an ongoing debate]]. Journal of Informetrics, 2(2):107-127, 2008.

* [[Three senses of argument]]
* [[From arguments in natural language to argumentation frameworks]]
* Peter McBurney, David Hitchcock, and Simon Parsons. [[The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue]]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95-132, 2007.
* Raquel Fern�andez and Ulle Endriss. [[Abstract models for dialogue protocols]]. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 16(2):121-140, 2007
* [[Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text]]

* [[From policy-making statements to first-order logic]]
* [[Argument mining from RADB and its usage in arguing agents and intelligent tutoring system]]
* [[A first step towards argument mining and its use in arguing agents and its]]
* [[Approaches to text mining arguments from legal cases]]
* [[On the exploration and exploitation of structural similarities in argumentative discourses]]
* [[Semantic models for policy deliberation]]
* [[Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases]]
* [[Multi-agent based classification using argumentation From experience]]
* [[Towards annotating and extracting textual legal case elements]]
* [[Argumentation semantics of communicative action]]
* Fréard, D., Denis, A., Détienne, F., Baker, M., Quignard, M., & Barcellini, F. (2010, August 25). [[The role of argumentation in online epistemic communities: The anatomy of a conflict in Wikipedia]]. Retrieved February 28, 2011, from http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00516994/en/
* d’Astous, P., De ́tienne, F., Robillard, P.N., Visser, W., 2001. [[Quantitative measurements of the influence of participants’ roles during peer review meetings]]. Empirical Software Engineering 6, 143–159.
* Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P., 2002. [[Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team communication]]. Design Studies 23 (5), 473–496.

==Persuasion==
* [[Persuasion detection in conversation]], Henry T. Gilbert, I. V., Master's thesis at Naval Postgraduate School, 2010.

==Wikipedia==
*[[Information quality work organization in Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia]]

*[[Wikipedian self-governance in action: Motivating the policy lens]]
*[[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]

===Deletion===
* S. K. Lam, J. Karim, and J. Riedl. [[The effects of group composition on decision quality in a social production community]]. In GROUP, pages 55–64, 2010. (decision quality for deletion)
* S. T. K. Lam and J. Riedl. [[Is Wikipedia growing a longer tail?]] In GROUP, pages 105–114, 2009. (overall reasons for deletion)
* D. Taraborelli and G. L. Ciampaglia. [[Beyond notability: Collective deliberation on content inclusion in Wikipedia]]. In Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops (SASOW), 2010.

===Talk pages===
* [[Talk before you type: Coordination in Wikipedia]]

==Other==

*[[The Semantic Web]]
*[[Which semantic web?]]
*[[The Social Semantic Web]]
*[[CiTO, the Citation Typing Ontology, and its use for annotation of reference lists and visualization of citation networks]]
*[[A network-based approach to text handling for the online scientific community]]
*[[Content-centered discussion mapping]]
*[[Study Supreme Court decision making with Linked Data]]
*Bates, Marcia J. "[[The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface.]]" Online Review 13 (October 1989): 407-424. http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/bates/berrypicking.html
*[[Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science]]
* Bates, Marcia J. "[[Search techniques]]." Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 16 (1981): 139-169.
* Paul Groth, Andrew Gibson, Jan Velterop (2010) [[The anatomy of a nanopublication]], 51-56. In Information Services & Use. http://www.mendeley.com/download/public/229912/3663016892/83f47cdc6d3cc086521abaac154a8f302a8c1587/dl.pdf
* Mons, Barend; van Haagen, Herman; Chichester, Christine; Hoen, Peter-Bram 't; den Dunnen, Johan T; van Ommen, Gertjan; van Mulligen, Erik; Singh, Bharat et al. (2011). "[[The value of data]]". Nature Genetics 43 (4): 281–283. doi:10.1038/ng0411-281. ISSN 1061-4036.

==Toolkit==
* List of [[Special:AllPages|all main namespace pages]]
* List of [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=4|all AcaWiki namespace pages]
* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula forumulas in wiki LaTeX]
* File bugs to [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wikimedia&component=AcaWiki Bugzilla]
* List of [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance%20desc&bug_status=__open__&product=Wikimedia&content=acawiki&list_id=3425 Open Bugs and Feature Requests].
* [[Template:Welcome]]
* [[Special:Version|What runs AcaWiki]]
* [[AcaWiki:Related people and groups]]
* [http://acawiki.org/Special:Ask?title=Special%3AAsk&q=[[DOI%3A%3A%2B]] semantic search example]
* [[Special:Userrights]]
* [[Special:SpecialPages]]
Deprecated:
* [[AcaWiki:Bugs]] and [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ issue tracker] (note: as of 2011-02-14, put please add nkinkade or nyergler as nosy on any ticket you create in the tracker)

My lists:
* [[User:Jodi.a.schneider/OfInterest|OfInterest]]

Lists I want:
* List of everything missing a URL -- with a way to indicate I've looked for a preprint/open access copy
* List of everything missing a DOI -- with a way to indicate I've searched for one
* List of images with unmarked copyright status (all of them at the moment)
* List of everything without at least one tag, maybe use [[Property:Tag]]

Other
* Ability to mark a journal openaccess, the entire run (could cause problems for time-dependent/articlebyarticle OA

Related projects and possible collaborators
* See http://mathoverflow.net/questions/13619/ (particularly [http://mathoverflow.net/users/1441/anton-petrunin Anton Petrunin])
** [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/ r-forum] (proposed project [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1&page=1#Item_0 description]
** [Ncat] - a math wiki for notes, may have some summaries, e.g. http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Categories+and+Sheaves and http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Topological+Quantum+Field+Theories+from+Compact+Lie+Groups
** [http://www.wikademic.org/ Wikademic] (some past discussion with Yossi Farjoun)
** [http://math-arch.org/] -- comments on math arXiv posts
* [http://researchblogging.org/ Research Blogging] is distributed and more opinionated, focusing on blog posts
* [http://www.bibdex.com/ bibdex] Allows private groups (Sunir Shah)

==Summaries Added==

==Argumentation==
* [[Argument Blogging]]
* [[Argument research corpus]]
* [[A computational model of argumentation in everyday conversation: A problem-centred approach]]
* [[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]]
* [[Expressing Argumentative Discussions in Social Media Sites]] - done
* [[Providing argument support for e-participation]]
* [[Spatial hypertext: An alternative to navigational and semantic links]]
* [[A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation]]
* [[Back to the future: Dimensions revisited]]
* [[Bottom-up argumentation]]
* [[Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis]]

==Systems & Projects==
* [[But, see, accord: Generating "Blue Book" citations in HYPO]]
*[[Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis]]
* [[Zest: Discussion mapping for mailing lists]]
* [[Value-based argumentation for democratic decision support]] (Parmenides)
===IMPACT project===
* [[Towards a structured online consultation tool]]
* [[A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making]]
* [[Towards Web-based mass argumentation in natural language]]

===IBIS===
*[[IBIS--a convincing concept...but a lousy instrument]]
* [[Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 Years on from gIBIS and QOC]]

===ScholOnto===
* [[Ontological foundations for scholarly debate mapping technology]]
* [[Modelling discourse in contested domains: A semiotic and cognitive framework]]
* [[Modeling naturalistic argumentation in research literatures: Representation and interaction design issues]]

===WWAW===
*[[Mass argumentation and the semantic web]]
*[[Towards an argument interchange format]]

===Argument Zoning===
(publication order)
* [[Task-based evaluation of summary quality: Describing relationships between scientific papers]]
* [[An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles]]
* [[Discourse-level argumentation in scientific articles: Human and automatic annotation.]]
* [[What's yours and what's mine: Determining intellectual attribution in scientific text]]
* [[Argumentative Zoning for improved citation indexing]]
* [[Towards discipline-independent argumentative zoning: Evidence from chemistry and computational linguistics]]

====Work primarily based on Argument Zoning====
=====Legal domain=====
* [[Summarising legal texts: Sentential tense and argumentative roles]]
* [[Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts]]
* [[Study on sentence relations in the automatic detection of argumentation in legal cases]] -- really uses argument zoning little to not at all

=====Scientific papers=====
* [[Ontology-based modelling of related work sections in research articles: Using CRFs for developing semantic data based information retrieval systems]]

===Barcellini's studies of the Python community===
*[[Participation in online interaction spaces: Design-use mediation in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[User and developer mediation in an Open Source Software community: Boundary spanning through cross participation in online discussions]]
*[[A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[A study of online discussion in an Open-Source community: reconstructing thematic coherence and argumentation from quotation practices]]
*[[Thematic coherence and quotation practices in OSS design-oriented online discussions]]

===Online argumentation===

==Frameworks and ontologies==
*[[An abstract framework for modeling argumentation in virtual communities]]
*[[Adding provenance and evolution information to modularized argumentation models]]
*[[Expressing argumentative discussions in social media sites]]

==Systems==
*[[Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 argumentation]] -- good discussion of what existing argumentation tools are lacking

*[[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]] -- dispute-resolution

==Linguistics==

===Argumentation Mining===

====Stance====
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]
* [[Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges]]

====Focus on Corpus Construction & Features Analysis for Machine Learning====
* [[How can you say such things?!?: Recognizing disagreement in informal political argument]] -- forum posts
* [[Cats rule and dogs drool!: Classifying stance in online debate]] -- debate systems (e.g. ConvinceMe)
** Journal version: [[That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate]]

====Argumentation Schemes====
* [[Classifying arguments by scheme]]

====Persuasion====
* [[A microtext corpus for persuasion detection in dialog]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]

===Sentiment Analysis===
* [[Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews]]
* [[Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree]]

===Focus on Discourse Analysis===
*[[Leave a reply: An analysis of weblog comments]]

===Social Experiments===
*[[Social validation of collective annotations: Definition and experiment]] - annotation

===Power===
*[[Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums]]

==Discourse Structures==
* [[Analyzing Discourse Structure to Coordinate Educational Forums]]

===Rhetorical Relations===
* [[Discourse-marking of concession and contrast in asynchronous online discussion]]
* [[Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: An assessment]]

==Semantic Web==
*[[Implementing Semantic Web applications: reference architecture and challenges]]

==Social Semantic Web==
*[[Produce and Consume Linked Data with Drupal!]]
*[[What Would It Mean to Blog on the Semantic Web?]]

==HCI & CSCW==
*[[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers]]
*[[FeedWinnower: layering structures over collections of information streams]]
* [[What is social informatics and why does it matter?]]
* [[Participatory mashups: Using users to make data mashable]]
* [[Seven privacy worries in ubiquitous social computing]]

==Health==
*[[Self-Control Relies on Glucose as a Limited Energy Source: Willpower Is More Than a Metaphor]]
*[[Predicting adverse drug events using pharmacological network models]]

==Ireland==
* [[The extent of clientelism in Irish politics: Evidence from classifying Dáil questions on a local-national dimension]]

==Scientific Communication, Scholarly Publishing==
*[[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
*[[How to Review a Paper]]
* [[A wiki for Mizar: Motivation, considerations, and initial prototype]]
* [[New scenarios in scholarly publishing and debate]]
* [[Semantic Web and Social Web heading towards living documents in the life sciences]]

==Twitter==
* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms]]
* [[Unsupervised modeling of Twitter conversations]]
* [[Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining]]

===ICWSM 2010===
* [[Characterizing microblogs with topic models]]
* [[From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series]]
* [[Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks]]
* [[Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy]]
* [[Microblogging inside and outside the workplace]]
* [[Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment]]

==Wikipedia summaries==
* [[Beyond Wikipedia: Coordination and conflict in online production groups]]
* [[Readers are not free-riders: Reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia]]
* [[What Wikipedia deletes: Characterizing dangerous collaborative content]]
* [[Enhancing Wikipedia with semantic technologies]] (for Research Newsleter)
* [[Biographical social networks on Wikipedia - A cross-cultural study of links that made history]]

===Talk pages===
* [[Behind the article: Recognizing dialog acts in Wikipedia talk pages]]
* [[There is no deadline - Time evolution of Wikipedia discussions]]

===Wikimania 2010 summaries===
* [[Judicial citation to Wikipedia in published federal court opinions]]
* [[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]
* [[Wikipedia leeches? The promotion of traffic through a collaborative web format]]

==General information science==
*[[Idea tactics]]
*[[Information search tactics]]

<hr>
==Summaries I might write if somebody else doesn't do it first:==
* [[The rhetorical parsing, summarization, and generation of natural language texts]]
* [[Construction of disambiguated folksonomy ontologies using Wikipedia]]
* Antoine Isaac & Ed Summers (ed), [[SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System primer]], W3C Working Group Note (2009), especially the Appendix "Correspondences between ISO-2788/5964 and SKOS constructs"
* Alistair Miles & Brian Matthews, [[Review of RDF thesaurus work]] (SWAD-Europe Project deliverable)
* Brian Matthews, Alistair Miles & Michael Wilson, "[[Modelling thesauri for the Semantic Web]]", submission to workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (2003)
* Various articles on information quality from the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RENDER_Bibliography RENDER bibliography]
* Robert Sanderson, Benjamin Albritton, Rafael Schwemmer, and Herbert Van de Sompel. SharedCanvas: a collaborative model for medieval manuscript layout dissemination. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998111 JCDL 2011, uses Linked Data to help present manuscripts
* David Bamman and Gregory Crane. 2011. Measuring historical word sense variation. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998078 JCDL 2011, uses corpus statistics to automatically identify word sense variation in Latin:

==Articles I'd like somebody else to summarize:==
* [[The role of mentorship in protege performance]]
* [[Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions]]
* The five most influential papers in usability (see [http://www.measuringusability.com/blog/five-papers.php list]:
:** [[Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think]]
:** [[Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces]]
:** [[Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods]]
:** [[Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough?]]
:** [[Do usability evaluators agree on what usability problems are?]]
:Also their runners-up:
:** [[Tutorials for the first-time computer user]]
:** [[Human factors and usability]]
:** [[Testing small system customer setup]]
:** [[A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems]]
:** [[The evaluator effect in usability tests]]
* stuff from Jeff Jarvis' [http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/07/07/publicness-bibliography/ Publicness bibliography]
* [[Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology‎]]
* [[The collapse of complex societies]] (see [http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/04/the-collapse-of-complex-business-models/ Shirky's summary])
* [[Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis]]

* via http://himsit.com/musings/facebook/
** James Coleman’s [[Social capital in the creation of human capital]]
** Robert Putnam’s [[Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital]]
** [[Impact of state-level social capital on the emergence of virtual communities]]
** [[The productivity paradox of information technology]] [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632 DOI full-text]

* Psychology
** [[False-Positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant]]

User:Jodi.a.schneider/Assessing the Impact of Media Polarization on Public Health Emergencies

2021-02-01T21:30:05Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

Summaries for [https://ischool.illinois.edu/news-events/news/2020/07/schneider-awarded-linowes-fellowship Assessing the Impact of Media Polarization on Public Health Emergencies]

* [[Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data]]
*

User:Jodi.a.schneider/Assessing the Impact of Media Polarization on Public Health Emergencies

2021-02-01T21:29:06Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Assessing the Impact of Media Polarization on Public Health Emergencies

Summaries for Assessing the Impact of Media Polarization on Public Health Emergencies

User:Jrm10

2021-02-01T21:27:06Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Creating user page for new user.

My name is Jefferson Mathews. I am a sophomore majoring in statistics from Virginia Beach, VA. I currently interning in Dr. Schnieder's Info Quality Lab doing research on political bias in media. My current project specifically looks into the Opioid Crisis in detail while also examining other case studies of media polarization.

User talk:Jrm10

2021-02-01T21:27:06Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Welcome!

'''Welcome to ''AcaWiki''!'''
We hope you will contribute much and well.
You will probably want to read the [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Help:Contents help pages].
Again, welcome and have fun! [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] ([[User talk:Jodi.a.schneider|talk]]) 21:27, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

User:Mayamose1

2021-02-01T21:26:55Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Creating user page for new user.

I am an undergraduate student graduating this May. After graduation, I will be pursuing a graduate degree in Psychology. I am using this site to add literature about my undergraduate research topic to ACA Wiki. I am excited to work on the interface and see how to utilize this resource.

User talk:Mayamose1

2021-02-01T21:26:55Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Welcome!

User:Jodi.a.schneider

2021-01-25T23:33:24Z

Jodi.a.schneider: * Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data

{{User
|name=Jodi Schneider
|photo=Jodi.jpg
|location=Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
|bio=I primarily used Acawiki for my Ph.D. in social/semantic web at DER]. Used to be the Community Liaison for AcaWiki
|blog=http://jodischneider.com/
|favorites=People Can Be So Fake: A New Dimension To Privacy And Technology Scholarship
|links=http://jodischneider.com/jodi.html
}}

==Cline/Media summaries==
* [[Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data]]

==In Progress==

* [[Persuasion in practical argument using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks]] (in progress)
* [[Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports]]

==Soon==
* [[Automatic argumentation detection and its role in law and the Semantic Web]]

==To review/improve==

* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
* [[Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]

==Summaries I mean to write:==
==Argumentation==

* [[A legal case OWL ontology with an instantiation of Popov v. Hayashi]]
* [[A speech act theory of metadiscourse]]
* [[An ontology in OWL for legal case-based reasoning]]

* K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. [[Justifying practical reasoning]]. In F. Grasso, C. Reed, and G. Carenini, editors, Proc. of the 4th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, pages 87-90, Valencia, Spain, 2004. http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~katie/cmna04.pdf
* Rudy Prabowo, Michael Thelwall, Iina Hellsten, and Andrea Scharnhorst. [[Evolving debate in online communication: A graph analytical approach]]. Internet Research, 18(5):520{540, 2008.
* Rudy Prabowo and Mike Thelwall. [[Finding and tracking subjects within an ongoing debate]]. Journal of Informetrics, 2(2):107-127, 2008.

* [[Three senses of argument]]
* [[From arguments in natural language to argumentation frameworks]]
* Peter McBurney, David Hitchcock, and Simon Parsons. [[The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue]]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95-132, 2007.
* Raquel Fern�andez and Ulle Endriss. [[Abstract models for dialogue protocols]]. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 16(2):121-140, 2007
* [[Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text]]

* [[From policy-making statements to first-order logic]]
* [[Argument mining from RADB and its usage in arguing agents and intelligent tutoring system]]
* [[A first step towards argument mining and its use in arguing agents and its]]
* [[Approaches to text mining arguments from legal cases]]
* [[On the exploration and exploitation of structural similarities in argumentative discourses]]
* [[Semantic models for policy deliberation]]
* [[Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases]]
* [[Multi-agent based classification using argumentation From experience]]
* [[Towards annotating and extracting textual legal case elements]]
* [[Argumentation semantics of communicative action]]
* Fréard, D., Denis, A., Détienne, F., Baker, M., Quignard, M., & Barcellini, F. (2010, August 25). [[The role of argumentation in online epistemic communities: The anatomy of a conflict in Wikipedia]]. Retrieved February 28, 2011, from http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00516994/en/
* d’Astous, P., De ́tienne, F., Robillard, P.N., Visser, W., 2001. [[Quantitative measurements of the influence of participants’ roles during peer review meetings]]. Empirical Software Engineering 6, 143–159.
* Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P., 2002. [[Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team communication]]. Design Studies 23 (5), 473–496.

==Persuasion==
* [[Persuasion detection in conversation]], Henry T. Gilbert, I. V., Master's thesis at Naval Postgraduate School, 2010.

==Wikipedia==
*[[Information quality work organization in Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia]]

*[[Wikipedian self-governance in action: Motivating the policy lens]]
*[[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]

===Deletion===
* S. K. Lam, J. Karim, and J. Riedl. [[The effects of group composition on decision quality in a social production community]]. In GROUP, pages 55–64, 2010. (decision quality for deletion)
* S. T. K. Lam and J. Riedl. [[Is Wikipedia growing a longer tail?]] In GROUP, pages 105–114, 2009. (overall reasons for deletion)
* D. Taraborelli and G. L. Ciampaglia. [[Beyond notability: Collective deliberation on content inclusion in Wikipedia]]. In Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops (SASOW), 2010.

===Talk pages===
* [[Talk before you type: Coordination in Wikipedia]]

==Other==

*[[The Semantic Web]]
*[[Which semantic web?]]
*[[The Social Semantic Web]]
*[[CiTO, the Citation Typing Ontology, and its use for annotation of reference lists and visualization of citation networks]]
*[[A network-based approach to text handling for the online scientific community]]
*[[Content-centered discussion mapping]]
*[[Study Supreme Court decision making with Linked Data]]
*Bates, Marcia J. "[[The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface.]]" Online Review 13 (October 1989): 407-424. http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/bates/berrypicking.html
*[[Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science]]
* Bates, Marcia J. "[[Search techniques]]." Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 16 (1981): 139-169.
* Paul Groth, Andrew Gibson, Jan Velterop (2010) [[The anatomy of a nanopublication]], 51-56. In Information Services & Use. http://www.mendeley.com/download/public/229912/3663016892/83f47cdc6d3cc086521abaac154a8f302a8c1587/dl.pdf
* Mons, Barend; van Haagen, Herman; Chichester, Christine; Hoen, Peter-Bram 't; den Dunnen, Johan T; van Ommen, Gertjan; van Mulligen, Erik; Singh, Bharat et al. (2011). "[[The value of data]]". Nature Genetics 43 (4): 281–283. doi:10.1038/ng0411-281. ISSN 1061-4036.

==Toolkit==
* List of [[Special:AllPages|all main namespace pages]]
* List of [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=4|all AcaWiki namespace pages]
* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula forumulas in wiki LaTeX]
* File bugs to [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wikimedia&component=AcaWiki Bugzilla]
* List of [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance%20desc&bug_status=__open__&product=Wikimedia&content=acawiki&list_id=3425 Open Bugs and Feature Requests].
* [[Template:Welcome]]
* [[Special:Version|What runs AcaWiki]]
* [[AcaWiki:Related people and groups]]
* [http://acawiki.org/Special:Ask?title=Special%3AAsk&q=[[DOI%3A%3A%2B]] semantic search example]
* [[Special:Userrights]]
* [[Special:SpecialPages]]
Deprecated:
* [[AcaWiki:Bugs]] and [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ issue tracker] (note: as of 2011-02-14, put please add nkinkade or nyergler as nosy on any ticket you create in the tracker)

My lists:
* [[User:Jodi.a.schneider/OfInterest|OfInterest]]

Lists I want:
* List of everything missing a URL -- with a way to indicate I've looked for a preprint/open access copy
* List of everything missing a DOI -- with a way to indicate I've searched for one
* List of images with unmarked copyright status (all of them at the moment)
* List of everything without at least one tag, maybe use [[Property:Tag]]

Other
* Ability to mark a journal openaccess, the entire run (could cause problems for time-dependent/articlebyarticle OA

Related projects and possible collaborators
* See http://mathoverflow.net/questions/13619/ (particularly [http://mathoverflow.net/users/1441/anton-petrunin Anton Petrunin])
** [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/ r-forum] (proposed project [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1&page=1#Item_0 description]
** [Ncat] - a math wiki for notes, may have some summaries, e.g. http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Categories+and+Sheaves and http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Topological+Quantum+Field+Theories+from+Compact+Lie+Groups
** [http://www.wikademic.org/ Wikademic] (some past discussion with Yossi Farjoun)
** [http://math-arch.org/] -- comments on math arXiv posts
* [http://researchblogging.org/ Research Blogging] is distributed and more opinionated, focusing on blog posts
* [http://www.bibdex.com/ bibdex] Allows private groups (Sunir Shah)

==Summaries Added==

==Argumentation==
* [[Argument Blogging]]
* [[Argument research corpus]]
* [[A computational model of argumentation in everyday conversation: A problem-centred approach]]
* [[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]]
* [[Expressing Argumentative Discussions in Social Media Sites]] - done
* [[Providing argument support for e-participation]]
* [[Spatial hypertext: An alternative to navigational and semantic links]]
* [[A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation]]
* [[Back to the future: Dimensions revisited]]
* [[Bottom-up argumentation]]
* [[Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis]]

==Systems & Projects==
* [[But, see, accord: Generating "Blue Book" citations in HYPO]]
*[[Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis]]
* [[Zest: Discussion mapping for mailing lists]]
* [[Value-based argumentation for democratic decision support]] (Parmenides)
===IMPACT project===
* [[Towards a structured online consultation tool]]
* [[A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making]]
* [[Towards Web-based mass argumentation in natural language]]

===IBIS===
*[[IBIS--a convincing concept...but a lousy instrument]]
* [[Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 Years on from gIBIS and QOC]]

===ScholOnto===
* [[Ontological foundations for scholarly debate mapping technology]]
* [[Modelling discourse in contested domains: A semiotic and cognitive framework]]
* [[Modeling naturalistic argumentation in research literatures: Representation and interaction design issues]]

===WWAW===
*[[Mass argumentation and the semantic web]]
*[[Towards an argument interchange format]]

===Argument Zoning===
(publication order)
* [[Task-based evaluation of summary quality: Describing relationships between scientific papers]]
* [[An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles]]
* [[Discourse-level argumentation in scientific articles: Human and automatic annotation.]]
* [[What's yours and what's mine: Determining intellectual attribution in scientific text]]
* [[Argumentative Zoning for improved citation indexing]]
* [[Towards discipline-independent argumentative zoning: Evidence from chemistry and computational linguistics]]

====Work primarily based on Argument Zoning====
=====Legal domain=====
* [[Summarising legal texts: Sentential tense and argumentative roles]]
* [[Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts]]
* [[Study on sentence relations in the automatic detection of argumentation in legal cases]] -- really uses argument zoning little to not at all

=====Scientific papers=====
* [[Ontology-based modelling of related work sections in research articles: Using CRFs for developing semantic data based information retrieval systems]]

===Barcellini's studies of the Python community===
*[[Participation in online interaction spaces: Design-use mediation in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[User and developer mediation in an Open Source Software community: Boundary spanning through cross participation in online discussions]]
*[[A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[A study of online discussion in an Open-Source community: reconstructing thematic coherence and argumentation from quotation practices]]
*[[Thematic coherence and quotation practices in OSS design-oriented online discussions]]

===Online argumentation===

==Frameworks and ontologies==
*[[An abstract framework for modeling argumentation in virtual communities]]
*[[Adding provenance and evolution information to modularized argumentation models]]
*[[Expressing argumentative discussions in social media sites]]

==Systems==
*[[Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 argumentation]] -- good discussion of what existing argumentation tools are lacking

*[[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]] -- dispute-resolution

==Linguistics==

===Argumentation Mining===

====Stance====
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]
* [[Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges]]

====Focus on Corpus Construction & Features Analysis for Machine Learning====
* [[How can you say such things?!?: Recognizing disagreement in informal political argument]] -- forum posts
* [[Cats rule and dogs drool!: Classifying stance in online debate]] -- debate systems (e.g. ConvinceMe)
** Journal version: [[That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate]]

====Argumentation Schemes====
* [[Classifying arguments by scheme]]

====Persuasion====
* [[A microtext corpus for persuasion detection in dialog]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]

===Sentiment Analysis===
* [[Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews]]
* [[Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree]]

===Focus on Discourse Analysis===
*[[Leave a reply: An analysis of weblog comments]]

===Social Experiments===
*[[Social validation of collective annotations: Definition and experiment]] - annotation

===Power===
*[[Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums]]

==Discourse Structures==
* [[Analyzing Discourse Structure to Coordinate Educational Forums]]

===Rhetorical Relations===
* [[Discourse-marking of concession and contrast in asynchronous online discussion]]
* [[Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: An assessment]]

==Semantic Web==
*[[Implementing Semantic Web applications: reference architecture and challenges]]

==Social Semantic Web==
*[[Produce and Consume Linked Data with Drupal!]]
*[[What Would It Mean to Blog on the Semantic Web?]]

==HCI & CSCW==
*[[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers]]
*[[FeedWinnower: layering structures over collections of information streams]]
* [[What is social informatics and why does it matter?]]
* [[Participatory mashups: Using users to make data mashable]]
* [[Seven privacy worries in ubiquitous social computing]]

==Health==
*[[Self-Control Relies on Glucose as a Limited Energy Source: Willpower Is More Than a Metaphor]]
*[[Predicting adverse drug events using pharmacological network models]]

==Ireland==
* [[The extent of clientelism in Irish politics: Evidence from classifying Dáil questions on a local-national dimension]]

==Scientific Communication, Scholarly Publishing==
*[[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
*[[How to Review a Paper]]
* [[A wiki for Mizar: Motivation, considerations, and initial prototype]]
* [[New scenarios in scholarly publishing and debate]]
* [[Semantic Web and Social Web heading towards living documents in the life sciences]]

==Twitter==
* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms]]
* [[Unsupervised modeling of Twitter conversations]]
* [[Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining]]

===ICWSM 2010===
* [[Characterizing microblogs with topic models]]
* [[From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series]]
* [[Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks]]
* [[Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy]]
* [[Microblogging inside and outside the workplace]]
* [[Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment]]

==Wikipedia summaries==
* [[Beyond Wikipedia: Coordination and conflict in online production groups]]
* [[Readers are not free-riders: Reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia]]
* [[What Wikipedia deletes: Characterizing dangerous collaborative content]]
* [[Enhancing Wikipedia with semantic technologies]] (for Research Newsleter)
* [[Biographical social networks on Wikipedia - A cross-cultural study of links that made history]]

===Talk pages===
* [[Behind the article: Recognizing dialog acts in Wikipedia talk pages]]
* [[There is no deadline - Time evolution of Wikipedia discussions]]

===Wikimania 2010 summaries===
* [[Judicial citation to Wikipedia in published federal court opinions]]
* [[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]
* [[Wikipedia leeches? The promotion of traffic through a collaborative web format]]

==General information science==
*[[Idea tactics]]
*[[Information search tactics]]

<hr>
==Summaries I might write if somebody else doesn't do it first:==
* [[The rhetorical parsing, summarization, and generation of natural language texts]]
* [[Construction of disambiguated folksonomy ontologies using Wikipedia]]
* Antoine Isaac & Ed Summers (ed), [[SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System primer]], W3C Working Group Note (2009), especially the Appendix "Correspondences between ISO-2788/5964 and SKOS constructs"
* Alistair Miles & Brian Matthews, [[Review of RDF thesaurus work]] (SWAD-Europe Project deliverable)
* Brian Matthews, Alistair Miles & Michael Wilson, "[[Modelling thesauri for the Semantic Web]]", submission to workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (2003)
* Various articles on information quality from the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RENDER_Bibliography RENDER bibliography]
* Robert Sanderson, Benjamin Albritton, Rafael Schwemmer, and Herbert Van de Sompel. SharedCanvas: a collaborative model for medieval manuscript layout dissemination. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998111 JCDL 2011, uses Linked Data to help present manuscripts
* David Bamman and Gregory Crane. 2011. Measuring historical word sense variation. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998078 JCDL 2011, uses corpus statistics to automatically identify word sense variation in Latin:

==Articles I'd like somebody else to summarize:==
* [[The role of mentorship in protege performance]]
* [[Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions]]
* The five most influential papers in usability (see [http://www.measuringusability.com/blog/five-papers.php list]:
:** [[Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think]]
:** [[Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces]]
:** [[Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods]]
:** [[Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough?]]
:** [[Do usability evaluators agree on what usability problems are?]]
:Also their runners-up:
:** [[Tutorials for the first-time computer user]]
:** [[Human factors and usability]]
:** [[Testing small system customer setup]]
:** [[A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems]]
:** [[The evaluator effect in usability tests]]
* stuff from Jeff Jarvis' [http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/07/07/publicness-bibliography/ Publicness bibliography]
* [[Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology‎]]
* [[The collapse of complex societies]] (see [http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/04/the-collapse-of-complex-business-models/ Shirky's summary])
* [[Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis]]

* via http://himsit.com/musings/facebook/
** James Coleman’s [[Social capital in the creation of human capital]]
** Robert Putnam’s [[Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital]]
** [[Impact of state-level social capital on the emergence of virtual communities]]
** [[The productivity paradox of information technology]] [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632 DOI full-text]

* Psychology
** [[False-Positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant]]

Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data

2021-01-25T23:32:34Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Created page with "{{Summary |title=Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data |authors=Barberá Pablo |url=http://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpu011 |t..."

{{Summary
|title=Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data
|authors=Barberá Pablo
|url=http://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpu011
|tags=Twitter, media polarization
|journal=Political Analysis
|pub_date=2015
|doi=10.1093/pan/mpu011
}}

User:Jodi.a.schneider

2021-01-22T00:46:58Z

Jodi.a.schneider: update

{{User
|name=Jodi Schneider
|photo=Jodi.jpg
|location=Urbana-Champaign, Illinois
|bio=I primarily used Acawiki for my Ph.D. in social/semantic web at DER]. Used to be the Community Liaison for AcaWiki
|blog=http://jodischneider.com/
|favorites=People Can Be So Fake: A New Dimension To Privacy And Technology Scholarship
|links=http://jodischneider.com/jodi.html
}}
==In Progress==

* [[Persuasion in practical argument using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks]] (in progress)
* [[Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports]]

==Soon==
* [[Automatic argumentation detection and its role in law and the Semantic Web]]

==To review/improve==

* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
* [[Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]

==Summaries I mean to write:==
==Argumentation==

* [[A legal case OWL ontology with an instantiation of Popov v. Hayashi]]
* [[A speech act theory of metadiscourse]]
* [[An ontology in OWL for legal case-based reasoning]]

* K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. [[Justifying practical reasoning]]. In F. Grasso, C. Reed, and G. Carenini, editors, Proc. of the 4th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, pages 87-90, Valencia, Spain, 2004. http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~katie/cmna04.pdf
* Rudy Prabowo, Michael Thelwall, Iina Hellsten, and Andrea Scharnhorst. [[Evolving debate in online communication: A graph analytical approach]]. Internet Research, 18(5):520{540, 2008.
* Rudy Prabowo and Mike Thelwall. [[Finding and tracking subjects within an ongoing debate]]. Journal of Informetrics, 2(2):107-127, 2008.

* [[Three senses of argument]]
* [[From arguments in natural language to argumentation frameworks]]
* Peter McBurney, David Hitchcock, and Simon Parsons. [[The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue]]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95-132, 2007.
* Raquel Fern�andez and Ulle Endriss. [[Abstract models for dialogue protocols]]. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 16(2):121-140, 2007
* [[Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text]]

* [[From policy-making statements to first-order logic]]
* [[Argument mining from RADB and its usage in arguing agents and intelligent tutoring system]]
* [[A first step towards argument mining and its use in arguing agents and its]]
* [[Approaches to text mining arguments from legal cases]]
* [[On the exploration and exploitation of structural similarities in argumentative discourses]]
* [[Semantic models for policy deliberation]]
* [[Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases]]
* [[Multi-agent based classification using argumentation From experience]]
* [[Towards annotating and extracting textual legal case elements]]
* [[Argumentation semantics of communicative action]]
* Fréard, D., Denis, A., Détienne, F., Baker, M., Quignard, M., & Barcellini, F. (2010, August 25). [[The role of argumentation in online epistemic communities: The anatomy of a conflict in Wikipedia]]. Retrieved February 28, 2011, from http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00516994/en/
* d’Astous, P., De ́tienne, F., Robillard, P.N., Visser, W., 2001. [[Quantitative measurements of the influence of participants’ roles during peer review meetings]]. Empirical Software Engineering 6, 143–159.
* Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P., 2002. [[Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team communication]]. Design Studies 23 (5), 473–496.

==Persuasion==
* [[Persuasion detection in conversation]], Henry T. Gilbert, I. V., Master's thesis at Naval Postgraduate School, 2010.

==Wikipedia==
*[[Information quality work organization in Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia]]

*[[Wikipedian self-governance in action: Motivating the policy lens]]
*[[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]

===Deletion===
* S. K. Lam, J. Karim, and J. Riedl. [[The effects of group composition on decision quality in a social production community]]. In GROUP, pages 55–64, 2010. (decision quality for deletion)
* S. T. K. Lam and J. Riedl. [[Is Wikipedia growing a longer tail?]] In GROUP, pages 105–114, 2009. (overall reasons for deletion)
* D. Taraborelli and G. L. Ciampaglia. [[Beyond notability: Collective deliberation on content inclusion in Wikipedia]]. In Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops (SASOW), 2010.

===Talk pages===
* [[Talk before you type: Coordination in Wikipedia]]

==Other==

*[[The Semantic Web]]
*[[Which semantic web?]]
*[[The Social Semantic Web]]
*[[CiTO, the Citation Typing Ontology, and its use for annotation of reference lists and visualization of citation networks]]
*[[A network-based approach to text handling for the online scientific community]]
*[[Content-centered discussion mapping]]
*[[Study Supreme Court decision making with Linked Data]]
*Bates, Marcia J. "[[The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface.]]" Online Review 13 (October 1989): 407-424. http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/bates/berrypicking.html
*[[Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science]]
* Bates, Marcia J. "[[Search techniques]]." Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 16 (1981): 139-169.
* Paul Groth, Andrew Gibson, Jan Velterop (2010) [[The anatomy of a nanopublication]], 51-56. In Information Services & Use. http://www.mendeley.com/download/public/229912/3663016892/83f47cdc6d3cc086521abaac154a8f302a8c1587/dl.pdf
* Mons, Barend; van Haagen, Herman; Chichester, Christine; Hoen, Peter-Bram 't; den Dunnen, Johan T; van Ommen, Gertjan; van Mulligen, Erik; Singh, Bharat et al. (2011). "[[The value of data]]". Nature Genetics 43 (4): 281–283. doi:10.1038/ng0411-281. ISSN 1061-4036.

==Toolkit==
* List of [[Special:AllPages|all main namespace pages]]
* List of [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=4|all AcaWiki namespace pages]
* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula forumulas in wiki LaTeX]
* File bugs to [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wikimedia&component=AcaWiki Bugzilla]
* List of [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance%20desc&bug_status=__open__&product=Wikimedia&content=acawiki&list_id=3425 Open Bugs and Feature Requests].
* [[Template:Welcome]]
* [[Special:Version|What runs AcaWiki]]
* [[AcaWiki:Related people and groups]]
* [http://acawiki.org/Special:Ask?title=Special%3AAsk&q=[[DOI%3A%3A%2B]] semantic search example]
* [[Special:Userrights]]
* [[Special:SpecialPages]]
Deprecated:
* [[AcaWiki:Bugs]] and [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ issue tracker] (note: as of 2011-02-14, put please add nkinkade or nyergler as nosy on any ticket you create in the tracker)

My lists:
* [[User:Jodi.a.schneider/OfInterest|OfInterest]]

Lists I want:
* List of everything missing a URL -- with a way to indicate I've looked for a preprint/open access copy
* List of everything missing a DOI -- with a way to indicate I've searched for one
* List of images with unmarked copyright status (all of them at the moment)
* List of everything without at least one tag, maybe use [[Property:Tag]]

Other
* Ability to mark a journal openaccess, the entire run (could cause problems for time-dependent/articlebyarticle OA

Related projects and possible collaborators
* See http://mathoverflow.net/questions/13619/ (particularly [http://mathoverflow.net/users/1441/anton-petrunin Anton Petrunin])
** [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/ r-forum] (proposed project [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1&page=1#Item_0 description]
** [Ncat] - a math wiki for notes, may have some summaries, e.g. http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Categories+and+Sheaves and http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Topological+Quantum+Field+Theories+from+Compact+Lie+Groups
** [http://www.wikademic.org/ Wikademic] (some past discussion with Yossi Farjoun)
** [http://math-arch.org/] -- comments on math arXiv posts
* [http://researchblogging.org/ Research Blogging] is distributed and more opinionated, focusing on blog posts
* [http://www.bibdex.com/ bibdex] Allows private groups (Sunir Shah)

==Summaries Added==

==Argumentation==
* [[Argument Blogging]]
* [[Argument research corpus]]
* [[A computational model of argumentation in everyday conversation: A problem-centred approach]]
* [[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]]
* [[Expressing Argumentative Discussions in Social Media Sites]] - done
* [[Providing argument support for e-participation]]
* [[Spatial hypertext: An alternative to navigational and semantic links]]
* [[A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation]]
* [[Back to the future: Dimensions revisited]]
* [[Bottom-up argumentation]]
* [[Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis]]

==Systems & Projects==
* [[But, see, accord: Generating "Blue Book" citations in HYPO]]
*[[Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis]]
* [[Zest: Discussion mapping for mailing lists]]
* [[Value-based argumentation for democratic decision support]] (Parmenides)
===IMPACT project===
* [[Towards a structured online consultation tool]]
* [[A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making]]
* [[Towards Web-based mass argumentation in natural language]]

===IBIS===
*[[IBIS--a convincing concept...but a lousy instrument]]
* [[Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 Years on from gIBIS and QOC]]

===ScholOnto===
* [[Ontological foundations for scholarly debate mapping technology]]
* [[Modelling discourse in contested domains: A semiotic and cognitive framework]]
* [[Modeling naturalistic argumentation in research literatures: Representation and interaction design issues]]

===WWAW===
*[[Mass argumentation and the semantic web]]
*[[Towards an argument interchange format]]

===Argument Zoning===
(publication order)
* [[Task-based evaluation of summary quality: Describing relationships between scientific papers]]
* [[An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles]]
* [[Discourse-level argumentation in scientific articles: Human and automatic annotation.]]
* [[What's yours and what's mine: Determining intellectual attribution in scientific text]]
* [[Argumentative Zoning for improved citation indexing]]
* [[Towards discipline-independent argumentative zoning: Evidence from chemistry and computational linguistics]]

====Work primarily based on Argument Zoning====
=====Legal domain=====
* [[Summarising legal texts: Sentential tense and argumentative roles]]
* [[Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts]]
* [[Study on sentence relations in the automatic detection of argumentation in legal cases]] -- really uses argument zoning little to not at all

=====Scientific papers=====
* [[Ontology-based modelling of related work sections in research articles: Using CRFs for developing semantic data based information retrieval systems]]

===Barcellini's studies of the Python community===
*[[Participation in online interaction spaces: Design-use mediation in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[User and developer mediation in an Open Source Software community: Boundary spanning through cross participation in online discussions]]
*[[A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[A study of online discussion in an Open-Source community: reconstructing thematic coherence and argumentation from quotation practices]]
*[[Thematic coherence and quotation practices in OSS design-oriented online discussions]]

===Online argumentation===

==Frameworks and ontologies==
*[[An abstract framework for modeling argumentation in virtual communities]]
*[[Adding provenance and evolution information to modularized argumentation models]]
*[[Expressing argumentative discussions in social media sites]]

==Systems==
*[[Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 argumentation]] -- good discussion of what existing argumentation tools are lacking

*[[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]] -- dispute-resolution

==Linguistics==

===Argumentation Mining===

====Stance====
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]
* [[Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges]]

====Focus on Corpus Construction & Features Analysis for Machine Learning====
* [[How can you say such things?!?: Recognizing disagreement in informal political argument]] -- forum posts
* [[Cats rule and dogs drool!: Classifying stance in online debate]] -- debate systems (e.g. ConvinceMe)
** Journal version: [[That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate]]

====Argumentation Schemes====
* [[Classifying arguments by scheme]]

====Persuasion====
* [[A microtext corpus for persuasion detection in dialog]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]

===Sentiment Analysis===
* [[Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews]]
* [[Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree]]

===Focus on Discourse Analysis===
*[[Leave a reply: An analysis of weblog comments]]

===Social Experiments===
*[[Social validation of collective annotations: Definition and experiment]] - annotation

===Power===
*[[Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums]]

==Discourse Structures==
* [[Analyzing Discourse Structure to Coordinate Educational Forums]]

===Rhetorical Relations===
* [[Discourse-marking of concession and contrast in asynchronous online discussion]]
* [[Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: An assessment]]

==Semantic Web==
*[[Implementing Semantic Web applications: reference architecture and challenges]]

==Social Semantic Web==
*[[Produce and Consume Linked Data with Drupal!]]
*[[What Would It Mean to Blog on the Semantic Web?]]

==HCI & CSCW==
*[[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers]]
*[[FeedWinnower: layering structures over collections of information streams]]
* [[What is social informatics and why does it matter?]]
* [[Participatory mashups: Using users to make data mashable]]
* [[Seven privacy worries in ubiquitous social computing]]

==Health==
*[[Self-Control Relies on Glucose as a Limited Energy Source: Willpower Is More Than a Metaphor]]
*[[Predicting adverse drug events using pharmacological network models]]

==Ireland==
* [[The extent of clientelism in Irish politics: Evidence from classifying Dáil questions on a local-national dimension]]

==Scientific Communication, Scholarly Publishing==
*[[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
*[[How to Review a Paper]]
* [[A wiki for Mizar: Motivation, considerations, and initial prototype]]
* [[New scenarios in scholarly publishing and debate]]
* [[Semantic Web and Social Web heading towards living documents in the life sciences]]

==Twitter==
* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms]]
* [[Unsupervised modeling of Twitter conversations]]
* [[Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining]]

===ICWSM 2010===
* [[Characterizing microblogs with topic models]]
* [[From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series]]
* [[Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks]]
* [[Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy]]
* [[Microblogging inside and outside the workplace]]
* [[Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment]]

==Wikipedia summaries==
* [[Beyond Wikipedia: Coordination and conflict in online production groups]]
* [[Readers are not free-riders: Reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia]]
* [[What Wikipedia deletes: Characterizing dangerous collaborative content]]
* [[Enhancing Wikipedia with semantic technologies]] (for Research Newsleter)
* [[Biographical social networks on Wikipedia - A cross-cultural study of links that made history]]

===Talk pages===
* [[Behind the article: Recognizing dialog acts in Wikipedia talk pages]]
* [[There is no deadline - Time evolution of Wikipedia discussions]]

===Wikimania 2010 summaries===
* [[Judicial citation to Wikipedia in published federal court opinions]]
* [[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]
* [[Wikipedia leeches? The promotion of traffic through a collaborative web format]]

==General information science==
*[[Idea tactics]]
*[[Information search tactics]]

<hr>
==Summaries I might write if somebody else doesn't do it first:==
* [[The rhetorical parsing, summarization, and generation of natural language texts]]
* [[Construction of disambiguated folksonomy ontologies using Wikipedia]]
* Antoine Isaac & Ed Summers (ed), [[SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System primer]], W3C Working Group Note (2009), especially the Appendix "Correspondences between ISO-2788/5964 and SKOS constructs"
* Alistair Miles & Brian Matthews, [[Review of RDF thesaurus work]] (SWAD-Europe Project deliverable)
* Brian Matthews, Alistair Miles & Michael Wilson, "[[Modelling thesauri for the Semantic Web]]", submission to workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (2003)
* Various articles on information quality from the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RENDER_Bibliography RENDER bibliography]
* Robert Sanderson, Benjamin Albritton, Rafael Schwemmer, and Herbert Van de Sompel. SharedCanvas: a collaborative model for medieval manuscript layout dissemination. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998111 JCDL 2011, uses Linked Data to help present manuscripts
* David Bamman and Gregory Crane. 2011. Measuring historical word sense variation. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998078 JCDL 2011, uses corpus statistics to automatically identify word sense variation in Latin:

==Articles I'd like somebody else to summarize:==
* [[The role of mentorship in protege performance]]
* [[Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions]]
* The five most influential papers in usability (see [http://www.measuringusability.com/blog/five-papers.php list]:
:** [[Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think]]
:** [[Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces]]
:** [[Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods]]
:** [[Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough?]]
:** [[Do usability evaluators agree on what usability problems are?]]
:Also their runners-up:
:** [[Tutorials for the first-time computer user]]
:** [[Human factors and usability]]
:** [[Testing small system customer setup]]
:** [[A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems]]
:** [[The evaluator effect in usability tests]]
* stuff from Jeff Jarvis' [http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/07/07/publicness-bibliography/ Publicness bibliography]
* [[Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology‎]]
* [[The collapse of complex societies]] (see [http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/04/the-collapse-of-complex-business-models/ Shirky's summary])
* [[Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis]]

* via http://himsit.com/musings/facebook/
** James Coleman’s [[Social capital in the creation of human capital]]
** Robert Putnam’s [[Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital]]
** [[Impact of state-level social capital on the emergence of virtual communities]]
** [[The productivity paradox of information technology]] [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632 DOI full-text]

* Psychology
** [[False-Positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant]]

Titles That Announce Argumentative Claims in Biomedical Research Articles

2018-10-03T23:09:18Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Created page with "{{Summary |title=Titles That Announce Argumentative Claims in Biomedical Research Articles |authors=Heather Graves, Roger Graves, Robert E. Mercer, Mahzereen Akter |url=http:/..."

{{Summary
|title=Titles That Announce Argumentative Claims in Biomedical Research Articles
|authors=Heather Graves, Roger Graves, Robert E. Mercer, Mahzereen Akter
|url=http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W14-2113
|tags=argumentative claims, argumentation mining, biomedical literature, article titles
|journal=Proceedings of the First Workshop on Argumentation Mining
|pub_date=2014
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Persuasion detection in conversation

2013-03-08T18:51:23Z

Jodi.a.schneider: ML thesis linked; ==Availability== The corpus is available from Dr. Joel D. Young, Naval Postgraduate School Department of Computer Science.

{{Summary
|title=Persuasion detection in conversation
|authors=Henry T. Gilbert, I. V.
|url=http://edocs.nps.edu/npspubs/scholarly/theses/2010/Mar/10Mar_Gilbert.pdf
|tags=persuasion, online argumentation, negotiation,
|summary=This Master's thesis draws from Cialdini's [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Cialdini#6_key_principles_of_persuasion_by_Robert_Cialdini 6 key principles of persuasion] in order to create an annotated corpus of persuasion.

==Availability==
The corpus is available from Dr. Joel D. Young, Naval Postgraduate School Department of Computer Science.

==Annotation==
The corpus was drawn from 37 police transcripts, which three annotators tagged, in two rounds. In the first annotation, each turn was treated as an utterance. Persuasive elements--reason, reciprocity, commitment and consistency, social proof, scarcity, liking, authority, and scarcity--were tagged. "If there were multiple kinds of persuasion in an utterance, annotators were asked to rank them in order of importance."

Cohen's Kappa was used to evaluate agreement. Two main problems arose in the first round: "reason" was difficult to annotate and subsequently removed. Meanwhile, an "other" category was added, and category definitions were improved. Further, hostage taggers (not just police negotiators) made persuasive utterances; in the second round these were more consistently tagged.

The second round used improved examples and category examples (see pages 36-44).

==Results==
In transcripts, only 5-20% of the utterances were persuasive.

==Selected References==
* Cialdini, R. B. (2001). [[Influence: Science and practice]]. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
* Cialdini, R. B., Vincent, J. E., Lewis, S. K., Catalan, J., Wheeler, D., & Darby, B. L. (1975). [[Reciprocal concessions procedures for inducing compliance: The door-in-the-face technique]]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31 , 206-215.
* Cohen, J. (1960). [[A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales]]. Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol.20, No.1 , 37-46.
* Lin, W.-H., Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., & Hauptmann, A. (2006). [[Which side are you on? Identifying perspective at the document and sentence levels]]. Proceedings of the Conference on Natural Language Learning (CoNLL).
|relevance=Chapter 2 provides powerful examples of the principles of persuasion, drawn from police negotiation transcripts and social psychology experiments.

The author suggests that the corpus could be used to train machine learning algorithms for persuasion detection; see his colleague's master's thesis, [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]] which did that.

Additional suggestions are to look for correlations between dialogue acts and persuasion attempts.
|journal=Naval Postgraduate School
|pub_date=2010
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining

2013-03-08T18:45:59Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining
|authors=A. Pak, P. Paroubek
|tags=Twitter, opinion mining, sentiment analysis, Naive Bayes
|summary=This paper builds and evaluates a sentiment classifier trained on 300,000 tweets of positive, negative, and neutral emotion, using statistical linguistic analysis and a multinomial Naive Bayes classifier.
http://deepthoughtinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Twitter-as-a-Corpus-for-Sentiment-Analysis-and-Opinion-Mining.pdf

==Methodology==
Statistical linguistic analysis of the corpus. After collecting the corpus, they filter to remove URLs, user names, RT, and emoticons. Then they tokenize (keeping words with apostrophes) and remove stopwords. They construct n-grams, keeping the "not" with the previous or following word. Tried SVM, CRF, decided Naive Bayes was best. Try to increase accuracy by removing high entropy and low salience n-grams. Evaluate on a hand-annotated subset.

==Corpus==
300,000 posts in English. 100,000 containing positive emotion; 100,000 containing negative emotion; 100,000 neutral "that only state a fact or do not express any emotions". Objective texts were queried from newspapers. Positive and negative texts were found by querying for a variety of emoticons ( “:-)”, “:)”, “=)”, “:D” etc. for positive and “:-(”, “:(”, “=(”, “;(” for negative)

==See also==
* Interesting tool from
Alec Go, Lei Huang, and Richa Bhayani. 2009. Twitter sentiment analysis. Final Projects from CS224N for Spring 2008/2009 at The Stanford Natural Language Processing Group. http://www-nlp.stanford.edu/courses/cs224n/2009/fp/3.pdf

* Keeping the "not" with the previous or following word:
Theresa Wilson, Janyce Wiebe, and Paul Hoffmann. 2005. Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. In HLT ’05: Proceedings of the conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 347– 354, Morristown, NJ, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.

|relevance=POS tagging is challenging, e.g. "whose" misspelled for "who is"
|journal=LREC
|pub_date=2010
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining

2013-03-08T18:45:11Z

Jodi.a.schneider: |url=http://deepthoughtinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Twitter-as-a-Corpus-for-Sentiment-Analysis-and-Opinion-Mining.pdf

{{Summary
|title=Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining
|authors=A. Pak, P. Paroubek
|tags=Twitter, opinion mining, sentiment analysis, Naive Bayes
|summary=This paper builds and evaluates a sentiment classifier trained on 300,000 tweets of positive, negative, and neutral emotion, using statistical linguistic analysis and a multinomial Naive Bayes classifier.
|url=http://deepthoughtinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Twitter-as-a-Corpus-for-Sentiment-Analysis-and-Opinion-Mining.pdf

==Methodology==
Statistical linguistic analysis of the corpus. After collecting the corpus, they filter to remove URLs, user names, RT, and emoticons. Then they tokenize (keeping words with apostrophes) and remove stopwords. They construct n-grams, keeping the "not" with the previous or following word. Tried SVM, CRF, decided Naive Bayes was best. Try to increase accuracy by removing high entropy and low salience n-grams. Evaluate on a hand-annotated subset.

==Corpus==
300,000 posts in English. 100,000 containing positive emotion; 100,000 containing negative emotion; 100,000 neutral "that only state a fact or do not express any emotions". Objective texts were queried from newspapers. Positive and negative texts were found by querying for a variety of emoticons ( “:-)”, “:)”, “=)”, “:D” etc. for positive and “:-(”, “:(”, “=(”, “;(” for negative)

==See also==
* Interesting tool from
Alec Go, Lei Huang, and Richa Bhayani. 2009. Twitter sentiment analysis. Final Projects from CS224N for Spring 2008/2009 at The Stanford Natural Language Processing Group. http://www-nlp.stanford.edu/courses/cs224n/2009/fp/3.pdf

* Keeping the "not" with the previous or following word:
Theresa Wilson, Janyce Wiebe, and Paul Hoffmann. 2005. Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. In HLT ’05: Proceedings of the conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 347– 354, Morristown, NJ, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.

|relevance=POS tagging is challenging, e.g. "whose" misspelled for "who is"
|journal=LREC
|pub_date=2010
|subject=Computer Science
}}

User:Jodi.a.schneider

2013-01-04T17:47:24Z

Jodi.a.schneider: /* To review/improve */

{{User
|name=Jodi Schneider
|photo=Jodi.jpg
|location=DERI, Galway, Ireland
|bio=I'm a Ph.D. student in social/semantic web at [http://deri.ie DERI]. Used to be the Community Liaison for AcaWiki
|blog=http://jodischneider.com/
|favorites=People Can Be So Fake: A New Dimension To Privacy And Technology Scholarship
|links=http://jodischneider.com/publications.html
}}
==In Progress==

* [[Persuasion in practical argument using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks]] (in progress)
* [[Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports]]

==Soon==
* [[Automatic argumentation detection and its role in law and the Semantic Web]]

==To review/improve==

* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
* [[Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]

==Summaries I mean to write:==
==Argumentation==

* [[A legal case OWL ontology with an instantiation of Popov v. Hayashi]]
* [[A speech act theory of metadiscourse]]
* [[An ontology in OWL for legal case-based reasoning]]

* K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. [[Justifying practical reasoning]]. In F. Grasso, C. Reed, and G. Carenini, editors, Proc. of the 4th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, pages 87-90, Valencia, Spain, 2004. http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~katie/cmna04.pdf
* Rudy Prabowo, Michael Thelwall, Iina Hellsten, and Andrea Scharnhorst. [[Evolving debate in online communication: A graph analytical approach]]. Internet Research, 18(5):520{540, 2008.
* Rudy Prabowo and Mike Thelwall. [[Finding and tracking subjects within an ongoing debate]]. Journal of Informetrics, 2(2):107-127, 2008.

* [[Three senses of argument]]
* [[From arguments in natural language to argumentation frameworks]]
* Peter McBurney, David Hitchcock, and Simon Parsons. [[The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue]]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95-132, 2007.
* Raquel Fern�andez and Ulle Endriss. [[Abstract models for dialogue protocols]]. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 16(2):121-140, 2007
* [[Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text]]

* [[From policy-making statements to first-order logic]]
* [[Argument mining from RADB and its usage in arguing agents and intelligent tutoring system]]
* [[A first step towards argument mining and its use in arguing agents and its]]
* [[Approaches to text mining arguments from legal cases]]
* [[On the exploration and exploitation of structural similarities in argumentative discourses]]
* [[Semantic models for policy deliberation]]
* [[Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases]]
* [[Multi-agent based classification using argumentation From experience]]
* [[Towards annotating and extracting textual legal case elements]]
* [[Argumentation semantics of communicative action]]
* Fréard, D., Denis, A., Détienne, F., Baker, M., Quignard, M., & Barcellini, F. (2010, August 25). [[The role of argumentation in online epistemic communities: The anatomy of a conflict in Wikipedia]]. Retrieved February 28, 2011, from http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00516994/en/
* d’Astous, P., De ́tienne, F., Robillard, P.N., Visser, W., 2001. [[Quantitative measurements of the influence of participants’ roles during peer review meetings]]. Empirical Software Engineering 6, 143–159.
* Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P., 2002. [[Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team communication]]. Design Studies 23 (5), 473–496.

==Persuasion==
* [[Persuasion detection in conversation]], Henry T. Gilbert, I. V., Master's thesis at Naval Postgraduate School, 2010.

==Wikipedia==
*[[Information quality work organization in Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia]]

*[[Wikipedian self-governance in action: Motivating the policy lens]]
*[[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]

===Deletion===
* S. K. Lam, J. Karim, and J. Riedl. [[The effects of group composition on decision quality in a social production community]]. In GROUP, pages 55–64, 2010. (decision quality for deletion)
* S. T. K. Lam and J. Riedl. [[Is Wikipedia growing a longer tail?]] In GROUP, pages 105–114, 2009. (overall reasons for deletion)
* D. Taraborelli and G. L. Ciampaglia. [[Beyond notability: Collective deliberation on content inclusion in Wikipedia]]. In Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops (SASOW), 2010.

===Talk pages===
* [[Talk before you type: Coordination in Wikipedia]]

==Other==

*[[The Semantic Web]]
*[[Which semantic web?]]
*[[The Social Semantic Web]]
*[[CiTO, the Citation Typing Ontology, and its use for annotation of reference lists and visualization of citation networks]]
*[[A network-based approach to text handling for the online scientific community]]
*[[Content-centered discussion mapping]]
*[[Study Supreme Court decision making with Linked Data]]
*Bates, Marcia J. "[[The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface.]]" Online Review 13 (October 1989): 407-424. http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/bates/berrypicking.html
*[[Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science]]
* Bates, Marcia J. "[[Search techniques]]." Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 16 (1981): 139-169.
* Paul Groth, Andrew Gibson, Jan Velterop (2010) [[The anatomy of a nanopublication]], 51-56. In Information Services & Use. http://www.mendeley.com/download/public/229912/3663016892/83f47cdc6d3cc086521abaac154a8f302a8c1587/dl.pdf
* Mons, Barend; van Haagen, Herman; Chichester, Christine; Hoen, Peter-Bram 't; den Dunnen, Johan T; van Ommen, Gertjan; van Mulligen, Erik; Singh, Bharat et al. (2011). "[[The value of data]]". Nature Genetics 43 (4): 281–283. doi:10.1038/ng0411-281. ISSN 1061-4036.

==Toolkit==
* List of [[Special:AllPages|all main namespace pages]]
* List of [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=4|all AcaWiki namespace pages]
* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula forumulas in wiki LaTeX]
* File bugs to [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wikimedia&component=AcaWiki Bugzilla]
* List of [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance%20desc&bug_status=__open__&product=Wikimedia&content=acawiki&list_id=3425 Open Bugs and Feature Requests].
* [[Template:Welcome]]
* [[Special:Version|What runs AcaWiki]]
* [[AcaWiki:Related people and groups]]
* [http://acawiki.org/Special:Ask?title=Special%3AAsk&q=[[DOI%3A%3A%2B]] semantic search example]
* [[Special:Userrights]]
* [[Special:SpecialPages]]
Deprecated:
* [[AcaWiki:Bugs]] and [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ issue tracker] (note: as of 2011-02-14, put please add nkinkade or nyergler as nosy on any ticket you create in the tracker)

My lists:
* [[User:Jodi.a.schneider/OfInterest|OfInterest]]

Lists I want:
* List of everything missing a URL -- with a way to indicate I've looked for a preprint/open access copy
* List of everything missing a DOI -- with a way to indicate I've searched for one
* List of images with unmarked copyright status (all of them at the moment)
* List of everything without at least one tag, maybe use [[Property:Tag]]

Other
* Ability to mark a journal openaccess, the entire run (could cause problems for time-dependent/articlebyarticle OA

Related projects and possible collaborators
* See http://mathoverflow.net/questions/13619/ (particularly [http://mathoverflow.net/users/1441/anton-petrunin Anton Petrunin])
** [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/ r-forum] (proposed project [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1&page=1#Item_0 description]
** [Ncat] - a math wiki for notes, may have some summaries, e.g. http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Categories+and+Sheaves and http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Topological+Quantum+Field+Theories+from+Compact+Lie+Groups
** [http://www.wikademic.org/ Wikademic] (some past discussion with Yossi Farjoun)
** [http://math-arch.org/] -- comments on math arXiv posts
* [http://researchblogging.org/ Research Blogging] is distributed and more opinionated, focusing on blog posts
* [http://www.bibdex.com/ bibdex] Allows private groups (Sunir Shah)

==Summaries Added==

==Argumentation==
* [[Argument Blogging]]
* [[Argument research corpus]]
* [[A computational model of argumentation in everyday conversation: A problem-centred approach]]
* [[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]]
* [[Expressing Argumentative Discussions in Social Media Sites]] - done
* [[Providing argument support for e-participation]]
* [[Spatial hypertext: An alternative to navigational and semantic links]]
* [[A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation]]
* [[Back to the future: Dimensions revisited]]
* [[Bottom-up argumentation]]
* [[Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis]]

==Systems & Projects==
* [[But, see, accord: Generating "Blue Book" citations in HYPO]]
*[[Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis]]
* [[Zest: Discussion mapping for mailing lists]]
* [[Value-based argumentation for democratic decision support]] (Parmenides)
===IMPACT project===
* [[Towards a structured online consultation tool]]
* [[A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making]]
* [[Towards Web-based mass argumentation in natural language]]

===IBIS===
*[[IBIS--a convincing concept...but a lousy instrument]]
* [[Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 Years on from gIBIS and QOC]]

===ScholOnto===
* [[Ontological foundations for scholarly debate mapping technology]]
* [[Modelling discourse in contested domains: A semiotic and cognitive framework]]
* [[Modeling naturalistic argumentation in research literatures: Representation and interaction design issues]]

===WWAW===
*[[Mass argumentation and the semantic web]]
*[[Towards an argument interchange format]]

===Argument Zoning===
(publication order)
* [[Task-based evaluation of summary quality: Describing relationships between scientific papers]]
* [[An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles]]
* [[Discourse-level argumentation in scientific articles: Human and automatic annotation.]]
* [[What's yours and what's mine: Determining intellectual attribution in scientific text]]
* [[Argumentative Zoning for improved citation indexing]]
* [[Towards discipline-independent argumentative zoning: Evidence from chemistry and computational linguistics]]

====Work primarily based on Argument Zoning====
=====Legal domain=====
* [[Summarising legal texts: Sentential tense and argumentative roles]]
* [[Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts]]
* [[Study on sentence relations in the automatic detection of argumentation in legal cases]] -- really uses argument zoning little to not at all

=====Scientific papers=====
* [[Ontology-based modelling of related work sections in research articles: Using CRFs for developing semantic data based information retrieval systems]]

===Barcellini's studies of the Python community===
*[[Participation in online interaction spaces: Design-use mediation in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[User and developer mediation in an Open Source Software community: Boundary spanning through cross participation in online discussions]]
*[[A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[A study of online discussion in an Open-Source community: reconstructing thematic coherence and argumentation from quotation practices]]
*[[Thematic coherence and quotation practices in OSS design-oriented online discussions]]

===Online argumentation===

==Frameworks and ontologies==
*[[An abstract framework for modeling argumentation in virtual communities]]
*[[Adding provenance and evolution information to modularized argumentation models]]
*[[Expressing argumentative discussions in social media sites]]

==Systems==
*[[Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 argumentation]] -- good discussion of what existing argumentation tools are lacking

*[[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]] -- dispute-resolution

==Linguistics==

===Argumentation Mining===

====Stance====
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]
* [[Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges]]

====Focus on Corpus Construction & Features Analysis for Machine Learning====
* [[How can you say such things?!?: Recognizing disagreement in informal political argument]] -- forum posts
* [[Cats rule and dogs drool!: Classifying stance in online debate]] -- debate systems (e.g. ConvinceMe)
** Journal version: [[That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate]]

====Argumentation Schemes====
* [[Classifying arguments by scheme]]

====Persuasion====
* [[A microtext corpus for persuasion detection in dialog]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]

===Sentiment Analysis===
* [[Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews]]
* [[Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree]]

===Focus on Discourse Analysis===
*[[Leave a reply: An analysis of weblog comments]]

===Social Experiments===
*[[Social validation of collective annotations: Definition and experiment]] - annotation

===Power===
*[[Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums]]

==Discourse Structures==
* [[Analyzing Discourse Structure to Coordinate Educational Forums]]

===Rhetorical Relations===
* [[Discourse-marking of concession and contrast in asynchronous online discussion]]
* [[Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: An assessment]]

==Semantic Web==
*[[Implementing Semantic Web applications: reference architecture and challenges]]

==Social Semantic Web==
*[[Produce and Consume Linked Data with Drupal!]]
*[[What Would It Mean to Blog on the Semantic Web?]]

==HCI & CSCW==
*[[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers]]
*[[FeedWinnower: layering structures over collections of information streams]]
* [[What is social informatics and why does it matter?]]
* [[Participatory mashups: Using users to make data mashable]]
* [[Seven privacy worries in ubiquitous social computing]]

==Health==
*[[Self-Control Relies on Glucose as a Limited Energy Source: Willpower Is More Than a Metaphor]]
*[[Predicting adverse drug events using pharmacological network models]]

==Ireland==
* [[The extent of clientelism in Irish politics: Evidence from classifying Dáil questions on a local-national dimension]]

==Scientific Communication, Scholarly Publishing==
*[[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
*[[How to Review a Paper]]
* [[A wiki for Mizar: Motivation, considerations, and initial prototype]]
* [[New scenarios in scholarly publishing and debate]]
* [[Semantic Web and Social Web heading towards living documents in the life sciences]]

==Twitter==
* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms]]
* [[Unsupervised modeling of Twitter conversations]]
* [[Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining]]

===ICWSM 2010===
* [[Characterizing microblogs with topic models]]
* [[From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series]]
* [[Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks]]
* [[Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy]]
* [[Microblogging inside and outside the workplace]]
* [[Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment]]

==Wikipedia summaries==
* [[Beyond Wikipedia: Coordination and conflict in online production groups]]
* [[Readers are not free-riders: Reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia]]
* [[What Wikipedia deletes: Characterizing dangerous collaborative content]]
* [[Enhancing Wikipedia with semantic technologies]] (for Research Newsleter)
* [[Biographical social networks on Wikipedia - A cross-cultural study of links that made history]]

===Talk pages===
* [[Behind the article: Recognizing dialog acts in Wikipedia talk pages]]
* [[There is no deadline - Time evolution of Wikipedia discussions]]

===Wikimania 2010 summaries===
* [[Judicial citation to Wikipedia in published federal court opinions]]
* [[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]
* [[Wikipedia leeches? The promotion of traffic through a collaborative web format]]

==General information science==
*[[Idea tactics]]
*[[Information search tactics]]

<hr>
==Summaries I might write if somebody else doesn't do it first:==
* [[The rhetorical parsing, summarization, and generation of natural language texts]]
* [[Construction of disambiguated folksonomy ontologies using Wikipedia]]
* Antoine Isaac & Ed Summers (ed), [[SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System primer]], W3C Working Group Note (2009), especially the Appendix "Correspondences between ISO-2788/5964 and SKOS constructs"
* Alistair Miles & Brian Matthews, [[Review of RDF thesaurus work]] (SWAD-Europe Project deliverable)
* Brian Matthews, Alistair Miles & Michael Wilson, "[[Modelling thesauri for the Semantic Web]]", submission to workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (2003)
* Various articles on information quality from the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RENDER_Bibliography RENDER bibliography]
* Robert Sanderson, Benjamin Albritton, Rafael Schwemmer, and Herbert Van de Sompel. SharedCanvas: a collaborative model for medieval manuscript layout dissemination. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998111 JCDL 2011, uses Linked Data to help present manuscripts
* David Bamman and Gregory Crane. 2011. Measuring historical word sense variation. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998078 JCDL 2011, uses corpus statistics to automatically identify word sense variation in Latin:

==Articles I'd like somebody else to summarize:==
* [[The role of mentorship in protege performance]]
* [[Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions]]
* The five most influential papers in usability (see [http://www.measuringusability.com/blog/five-papers.php list]:
:** [[Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think]]
:** [[Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces]]
:** [[Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods]]
:** [[Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough?]]
:** [[Do usability evaluators agree on what usability problems are?]]
:Also their runners-up:
:** [[Tutorials for the first-time computer user]]
:** [[Human factors and usability]]
:** [[Testing small system customer setup]]
:** [[A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems]]
:** [[The evaluator effect in usability tests]]
* stuff from Jeff Jarvis' [http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/07/07/publicness-bibliography/ Publicness bibliography]
* [[Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology‎]]
* [[The collapse of complex societies]] (see [http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/04/the-collapse-of-complex-business-models/ Shirky's summary])
* [[Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis]]

* via http://himsit.com/musings/facebook/
** James Coleman’s [[Social capital in the creation of human capital]]
** Robert Putnam’s [[Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital]]
** [[Impact of state-level social capital on the emergence of virtual communities]]
** [[The productivity paradox of information technology]] [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632 DOI full-text]

* Psychology
** [[False-Positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant]]

Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text

2012-10-10T17:42:15Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text
|authors=Raquel Mochales Palau, Marie-Francine Moens
|tags=argumentation mining, argumentation, legal argumentation
|relevance=Best student paper at AI&Law 2009
|journal=AI&Law 2009
|pub_date=2009
|doi=10.1145/1568234.1568246
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Classifying arguments by scheme

2012-10-03T12:31:18Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Classifying arguments by scheme
|authors=Vanessa Wei Feng and Graeme Hirst
|url=http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P/P11/P11-1099.pdf
|tags=machine learning, argumentation schemes, argumentation mining
|summary=The goal is to automatically identify Walton's [[Argumentation schemes]]. The approach is machine learning, using [[Argument research corpus]] as a training set.

The authors work with 5 schemes and report "We achieve accuracies of 63–91% in one-against-others classification and 80–94% in pairwise classification (baseline of 50% in both cases)."

==Schemes used==
# Argument from example
# Argument from cause to effect
# Practical reasoning
# Argument from consequences
# Argument from verbal classification

==Selected References==
* Walton, D.; Reed, C.; and Macagno, F. 2008. [[Argumentation schemes]]. Cambridge University Press.

* Robin Cohen. 1987. [[Analyzing the structure of argumentative discourse]]. Computational Linguistics, 13(1–2):11–24.

* Judith Dick. 1991a. [[A conceptual, case-relation representation of text for intelligent retrieval]]. Ph.D. thesis, Faculty of Library and Information Science, University of Toronto, April.

* Judith Dick. 1991b. [[Representation of legal text for conceptual retrieval]]. In Proceedings, Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 244–252, Oxford, June.

* Sarah George, Ingrid Zukerman, and Michael Niemann. 2007. [[Inferences, suppositions and explanatory extensions in argument interpretation]]. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 17(5):439–474.

==Cited related work==
Raquel Mochales' thesis work; the following are cited (others are covered elsewhere on Acawiki):

* Raquel Mochales and Marie-Francine Moens. 2008. [[Study on the structure of argumentation in case law]]. In Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, pages 11–20, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. IOS Press.

* Raquel Mochales and Marie-Francine Moens. 2009a. [[Argumentation mining: The detection, classiﬁcation and structure of arguments in text]]. In ICAIL ’09: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Arti- ﬁcial Intelligence and Law, pages 98–107, New York, NY, USA. ACM.

* Raquel Mochales and Marie-Francine Moens. 2009b. [[Automatic argumentation detection and its role in law and the semantic web]]. In Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Law, Ontologies and the Semantic Web, pages 115–129, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. IOS Press.

* Marie-Francine Moens, Erik Boiy, Raquel Mochales Palau, and Chris Reed. 2007. [[Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts]]. In ICAIL ’07: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Artiﬁcial Intelligence and Law, pages 225–230, New York, NY, USA. ACM.

|relevance=In my view, this points to a need for a real gold standard argumentation corpus.

==Mentioned by scholars==
* [http://nlpers.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/conferences-post-acl-and-icml.html ACL round-up]

==Extended version (Master's thesis)==
Vanessa Wei Feng. 2010. [[Classifying arguments by scheme (MSc thesis)]]. Technical report, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, November. http://ftp.cs.toronto.edu/pub/gh/Feng-MSc-2010.pdf

|journal=HLT
|pub_date=2011
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Classifying arguments by scheme

2012-10-03T12:21:48Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

Classifying arguments by scheme

2012-10-03T11:22:07Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

Classifying arguments by scheme

2012-10-03T11:19:55Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Classifying arguments by scheme
|authors=Vanessa Wei Feng and Graeme Hirst
|url=http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id2002472.2002597
|tags=machine learning, argumentation schemes, argumentation mining
|summary=The goal is to automatically identify Walton's [[Argumentation schemes]]. The approach is machine learning, using [[Argument research corpus]] as a training set.

The authors work with 5 schemes and report "We achieve accuracies of 63–91% in one-against-others classification and 80–94% in pairwise classification (baseline of 50% in both cases)."

==Schemes used==
# Argument from example
# Argument from cause to effect
# Practical reasoning
# Argument from consequences
# Argument from verbal classification

==Selected References==
Walton, D.; Reed, C.; and Macagno, F. 2008. [[Argumentation schemes]]. Cambridge University Press.
|relevance=In my view, this points to a need for a real gold standard argumentation corpus.
|journal=HLT
|pub_date=2011
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Classifying arguments by scheme

2012-10-03T11:12:44Z

Jodi.a.schneider: BibTeX auto import 2012-10-03 01:12:44

{{Summary
|title=Classifying arguments by scheme
|authors=Vanessa Wei Feng and Graeme Hirst
|pub_date=2011
|url=http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id2002472.2002597
}}

User:Jodi.a.schneider

2012-10-03T11:10:57Z

Jodi.a.schneider: /* Linguistics */ ====Argumentation Schemes==== * Classifying arguments by scheme

{{User
|name=Jodi Schneider
|photo=Jodi.jpg
|location=DERI, Galway, Ireland
|bio=I'm a Ph.D. student in social/semantic web at [http://deri.ie DERI]. Used to be the Community Liaison for AcaWiki
|blog=http://jodischneider.com/
|favorites=People Can Be So Fake: A New Dimension To Privacy And Technology Scholarship
|links=http://jodischneider.com/publications.html
}}
==In Progress==

* [[Persuasion in practical argument using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks]] (in progress)
* [[Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports]]

==Soon==
* [[Automatic argumentation detection and its role in law and the Semantic Web]]

==To review/improve==

* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
* [[Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination]]

==Summaries I mean to write:==
==Argumentation==

* [[A legal case OWL ontology with an instantiation of Popov v. Hayashi]]
* [[A speech act theory of metadiscourse]]
* [[An ontology in OWL for legal case-based reasoning]]

* K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. [[Justifying practical reasoning]]. In F. Grasso, C. Reed, and G. Carenini, editors, Proc. of the 4th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, pages 87-90, Valencia, Spain, 2004. http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~katie/cmna04.pdf
* Rudy Prabowo, Michael Thelwall, Iina Hellsten, and Andrea Scharnhorst. [[Evolving debate in online communication: A graph analytical approach]]. Internet Research, 18(5):520{540, 2008.
* Rudy Prabowo and Mike Thelwall. [[Finding and tracking subjects within an ongoing debate]]. Journal of Informetrics, 2(2):107-127, 2008.

* [[Three senses of argument]]
* [[From arguments in natural language to argumentation frameworks]]
* Peter McBurney, David Hitchcock, and Simon Parsons. [[The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue]]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95-132, 2007.
* Raquel Fern�andez and Ulle Endriss. [[Abstract models for dialogue protocols]]. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 16(2):121-140, 2007
* [[Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text]]

* [[From policy-making statements to first-order logic]]
* [[Argument mining from RADB and its usage in arguing agents and intelligent tutoring system]]
* [[A first step towards argument mining and its use in arguing agents and its]]
* [[Approaches to text mining arguments from legal cases]]
* [[On the exploration and exploitation of structural similarities in argumentative discourses]]
* [[Semantic models for policy deliberation]]
* [[Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases]]
* [[Multi-agent based classification using argumentation From experience]]
* [[Towards annotating and extracting textual legal case elements]]
* [[Argumentation semantics of communicative action]]
* Fréard, D., Denis, A., Détienne, F., Baker, M., Quignard, M., & Barcellini, F. (2010, August 25). [[The role of argumentation in online epistemic communities: The anatomy of a conflict in Wikipedia]]. Retrieved February 28, 2011, from http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00516994/en/
* d’Astous, P., De ́tienne, F., Robillard, P.N., Visser, W., 2001. [[Quantitative measurements of the influence of participants’ roles during peer review meetings]]. Empirical Software Engineering 6, 143–159.
* Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P., 2002. [[Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team communication]]. Design Studies 23 (5), 473–496.

==Persuasion==
* [[Persuasion detection in conversation]], Henry T. Gilbert, I. V., Master's thesis at Naval Postgraduate School, 2010.

==Wikipedia==
*[[Information quality work organization in Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia]]

*[[Wikipedian self-governance in action: Motivating the policy lens]]
*[[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]

===Deletion===
* S. K. Lam, J. Karim, and J. Riedl. [[The effects of group composition on decision quality in a social production community]]. In GROUP, pages 55–64, 2010. (decision quality for deletion)
* S. T. K. Lam and J. Riedl. [[Is Wikipedia growing a longer tail?]] In GROUP, pages 105–114, 2009. (overall reasons for deletion)
* D. Taraborelli and G. L. Ciampaglia. [[Beyond notability: Collective deliberation on content inclusion in Wikipedia]]. In Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops (SASOW), 2010.

===Talk pages===
* [[Talk before you type: Coordination in Wikipedia]]

==Other==

*[[The Semantic Web]]
*[[Which semantic web?]]
*[[The Social Semantic Web]]
*[[CiTO, the Citation Typing Ontology, and its use for annotation of reference lists and visualization of citation networks]]
*[[A network-based approach to text handling for the online scientific community]]
*[[Content-centered discussion mapping]]
*[[Study Supreme Court decision making with Linked Data]]
*Bates, Marcia J. "[[The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface.]]" Online Review 13 (October 1989): 407-424. http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/bates/berrypicking.html
*[[Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science]]
* Bates, Marcia J. "[[Search techniques]]." Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 16 (1981): 139-169.
* Paul Groth, Andrew Gibson, Jan Velterop (2010) [[The anatomy of a nanopublication]], 51-56. In Information Services & Use. http://www.mendeley.com/download/public/229912/3663016892/83f47cdc6d3cc086521abaac154a8f302a8c1587/dl.pdf
* Mons, Barend; van Haagen, Herman; Chichester, Christine; Hoen, Peter-Bram 't; den Dunnen, Johan T; van Ommen, Gertjan; van Mulligen, Erik; Singh, Bharat et al. (2011). "[[The value of data]]". Nature Genetics 43 (4): 281–283. doi:10.1038/ng0411-281. ISSN 1061-4036.

==Toolkit==
* List of [[Special:AllPages|all main namespace pages]]
* List of [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=4|all AcaWiki namespace pages]
* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula forumulas in wiki LaTeX]
* File bugs to [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wikimedia&component=AcaWiki Bugzilla]
* List of [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance%20desc&bug_status=__open__&product=Wikimedia&content=acawiki&list_id=3425 Open Bugs and Feature Requests].
* [[Template:Welcome]]
* [[Special:Version|What runs AcaWiki]]
* [[AcaWiki:Related people and groups]]
* [http://acawiki.org/Special:Ask?title=Special%3AAsk&q=[[DOI%3A%3A%2B]] semantic search example]
* [[Special:Userrights]]
* [[Special:SpecialPages]]
Deprecated:
* [[AcaWiki:Bugs]] and [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ issue tracker] (note: as of 2011-02-14, put please add nkinkade or nyergler as nosy on any ticket you create in the tracker)

My lists:
* [[User:Jodi.a.schneider/OfInterest|OfInterest]]

Lists I want:
* List of everything missing a URL -- with a way to indicate I've looked for a preprint/open access copy
* List of everything missing a DOI -- with a way to indicate I've searched for one
* List of images with unmarked copyright status (all of them at the moment)
* List of everything without at least one tag, maybe use [[Property:Tag]]

Other
* Ability to mark a journal openaccess, the entire run (could cause problems for time-dependent/articlebyarticle OA

Related projects and possible collaborators
* See http://mathoverflow.net/questions/13619/ (particularly [http://mathoverflow.net/users/1441/anton-petrunin Anton Petrunin])
** [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/ r-forum] (proposed project [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1&page=1#Item_0 description]
** [Ncat] - a math wiki for notes, may have some summaries, e.g. http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Categories+and+Sheaves and http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Topological+Quantum+Field+Theories+from+Compact+Lie+Groups
** [http://www.wikademic.org/ Wikademic] (some past discussion with Yossi Farjoun)
** [http://math-arch.org/] -- comments on math arXiv posts
* [http://researchblogging.org/ Research Blogging] is distributed and more opinionated, focusing on blog posts
* [http://www.bibdex.com/ bibdex] Allows private groups (Sunir Shah)

==Summaries Added==

==Argumentation==
* [[Argument Blogging]]
* [[Argument research corpus]]
* [[A computational model of argumentation in everyday conversation: A problem-centred approach]]
* [[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]]
* [[Expressing Argumentative Discussions in Social Media Sites]] - done
* [[Providing argument support for e-participation]]
* [[Spatial hypertext: An alternative to navigational and semantic links]]
* [[A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation]]
* [[Back to the future: Dimensions revisited]]
* [[Bottom-up argumentation]]
* [[Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis]]

==Systems & Projects==
* [[But, see, accord: Generating "Blue Book" citations in HYPO]]
*[[Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis]]
* [[Zest: Discussion mapping for mailing lists]]
* [[Value-based argumentation for democratic decision support]] (Parmenides)
===IMPACT project===
* [[Towards a structured online consultation tool]]
* [[A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making]]
* [[Towards Web-based mass argumentation in natural language]]

===IBIS===
*[[IBIS--a convincing concept...but a lousy instrument]]
* [[Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 Years on from gIBIS and QOC]]

===ScholOnto===
* [[Ontological foundations for scholarly debate mapping technology]]
* [[Modelling discourse in contested domains: A semiotic and cognitive framework]]
* [[Modeling naturalistic argumentation in research literatures: Representation and interaction design issues]]

===WWAW===
*[[Mass argumentation and the semantic web]]
*[[Towards an argument interchange format]]

===Argument Zoning===
(publication order)
* [[Task-based evaluation of summary quality: Describing relationships between scientific papers]]
* [[An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles]]
* [[Discourse-level argumentation in scientific articles: Human and automatic annotation.]]
* [[What's yours and what's mine: Determining intellectual attribution in scientific text]]
* [[Argumentative Zoning for improved citation indexing]]
* [[Towards discipline-independent argumentative zoning: Evidence from chemistry and computational linguistics]]

====Work primarily based on Argument Zoning====
=====Legal domain=====
* [[Summarising legal texts: Sentential tense and argumentative roles]]
* [[Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts]]
* [[Study on sentence relations in the automatic detection of argumentation in legal cases]] -- really uses argument zoning little to not at all

=====Scientific papers=====
* [[Ontology-based modelling of related work sections in research articles: Using CRFs for developing semantic data based information retrieval systems]]

===Barcellini's studies of the Python community===
*[[Participation in online interaction spaces: Design-use mediation in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[User and developer mediation in an Open Source Software community: Boundary spanning through cross participation in online discussions]]
*[[A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[A study of online discussion in an Open-Source community: reconstructing thematic coherence and argumentation from quotation practices]]
*[[Thematic coherence and quotation practices in OSS design-oriented online discussions]]

===Online argumentation===

==Frameworks and ontologies==
*[[An abstract framework for modeling argumentation in virtual communities]]
*[[Adding provenance and evolution information to modularized argumentation models]]
*[[Expressing argumentative discussions in social media sites]]

==Systems==
*[[Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 argumentation]] -- good discussion of what existing argumentation tools are lacking

*[[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]] -- dispute-resolution

==Linguistics==

===Argumentation Mining===

====Stance====
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]
* [[Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges]]

====Focus on Corpus Construction & Features Analysis for Machine Learning====
* [[How can you say such things?!?: Recognizing disagreement in informal political argument]] -- forum posts
* [[Cats rule and dogs drool!: Classifying stance in online debate]] -- debate systems (e.g. ConvinceMe)
** Journal version: [[That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate]]

====Argumentation Schemes====
* [[Classifying arguments by scheme]]

====Persuasion====
* [[A microtext corpus for persuasion detection in dialog]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]

===Sentiment Analysis===
* [[Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews]]
* [[Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree]]

===Focus on Discourse Analysis===
*[[Leave a reply: An analysis of weblog comments]]

===Social Experiments===
*[[Social validation of collective annotations: Definition and experiment]] - annotation

===Power===
*[[Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums]]

==Discourse Structures==
* [[Analyzing Discourse Structure to Coordinate Educational Forums]]

===Rhetorical Relations===
* [[Discourse-marking of concession and contrast in asynchronous online discussion]]
* [[Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: An assessment]]

==Semantic Web==
*[[Implementing Semantic Web applications: reference architecture and challenges]]

==Social Semantic Web==
*[[Produce and Consume Linked Data with Drupal!]]
*[[What Would It Mean to Blog on the Semantic Web?]]

==HCI & CSCW==
*[[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers]]
*[[FeedWinnower: layering structures over collections of information streams]]
* [[What is social informatics and why does it matter?]]
* [[Participatory mashups: Using users to make data mashable]]
* [[Seven privacy worries in ubiquitous social computing]]

==Health==
*[[Self-Control Relies on Glucose as a Limited Energy Source: Willpower Is More Than a Metaphor]]
*[[Predicting adverse drug events using pharmacological network models]]

==Ireland==
* [[The extent of clientelism in Irish politics: Evidence from classifying Dáil questions on a local-national dimension]]

==Scientific Communication, Scholarly Publishing==
*[[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
*[[How to Review a Paper]]
* [[A wiki for Mizar: Motivation, considerations, and initial prototype]]
* [[New scenarios in scholarly publishing and debate]]
* [[Semantic Web and Social Web heading towards living documents in the life sciences]]

==Twitter==
* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms]]
* [[Unsupervised modeling of Twitter conversations]]
* [[Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining]]

===ICWSM 2010===
* [[Characterizing microblogs with topic models]]
* [[From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series]]
* [[Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks]]
* [[Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy]]
* [[Microblogging inside and outside the workplace]]
* [[Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment]]

==Wikipedia summaries==
* [[Beyond Wikipedia: Coordination and conflict in online production groups]]
* [[Readers are not free-riders: Reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia]]
* [[What Wikipedia deletes: Characterizing dangerous collaborative content]]
* [[Enhancing Wikipedia with semantic technologies]] (for Research Newsleter)
* [[Biographical social networks on Wikipedia - A cross-cultural study of links that made history]]

===Talk pages===
* [[Behind the article: Recognizing dialog acts in Wikipedia talk pages]]
* [[There is no deadline - Time evolution of Wikipedia discussions]]

===Wikimania 2010 summaries===
* [[Judicial citation to Wikipedia in published federal court opinions]]
* [[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]
* [[Wikipedia leeches? The promotion of traffic through a collaborative web format]]

==General information science==
*[[Idea tactics]]
*[[Information search tactics]]

<hr>
==Summaries I might write if somebody else doesn't do it first:==
* [[The rhetorical parsing, summarization, and generation of natural language texts]]
* [[Construction of disambiguated folksonomy ontologies using Wikipedia]]
* Antoine Isaac & Ed Summers (ed), [[SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System primer]], W3C Working Group Note (2009), especially the Appendix "Correspondences between ISO-2788/5964 and SKOS constructs"
* Alistair Miles & Brian Matthews, [[Review of RDF thesaurus work]] (SWAD-Europe Project deliverable)
* Brian Matthews, Alistair Miles & Michael Wilson, "[[Modelling thesauri for the Semantic Web]]", submission to workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (2003)
* Various articles on information quality from the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RENDER_Bibliography RENDER bibliography]
* Robert Sanderson, Benjamin Albritton, Rafael Schwemmer, and Herbert Van de Sompel. SharedCanvas: a collaborative model for medieval manuscript layout dissemination. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998111 JCDL 2011, uses Linked Data to help present manuscripts
* David Bamman and Gregory Crane. 2011. Measuring historical word sense variation. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998078 JCDL 2011, uses corpus statistics to automatically identify word sense variation in Latin:

==Articles I'd like somebody else to summarize:==
* [[The role of mentorship in protege performance]]
* [[Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions]]
* The five most influential papers in usability (see [http://www.measuringusability.com/blog/five-papers.php list]:
:** [[Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think]]
:** [[Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces]]
:** [[Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods]]
:** [[Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough?]]
:** [[Do usability evaluators agree on what usability problems are?]]
:Also their runners-up:
:** [[Tutorials for the first-time computer user]]
:** [[Human factors and usability]]
:** [[Testing small system customer setup]]
:** [[A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems]]
:** [[The evaluator effect in usability tests]]
* stuff from Jeff Jarvis' [http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/07/07/publicness-bibliography/ Publicness bibliography]
* [[Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology‎]]
* [[The collapse of complex societies]] (see [http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/04/the-collapse-of-complex-business-models/ Shirky's summary])
* [[Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis]]

* via http://himsit.com/musings/facebook/
** James Coleman’s [[Social capital in the creation of human capital]]
** Robert Putnam’s [[Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital]]
** [[Impact of state-level social capital on the emergence of virtual communities]]
** [[The productivity paradox of information technology]] [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632 DOI full-text]

* Psychology
** [[False-Positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant]]

User:Jodi.a.schneider

2012-10-03T11:09:28Z

Jodi.a.schneider: /* Linguistics */ ===Power=== *Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums

{{User
|name=Jodi Schneider
|photo=Jodi.jpg
|location=DERI, Galway, Ireland
|bio=I'm a Ph.D. student in social/semantic web at [http://deri.ie DERI]. Used to be the Community Liaison for AcaWiki
|blog=http://jodischneider.com/
|favorites=People Can Be So Fake: A New Dimension To Privacy And Technology Scholarship
|links=http://jodischneider.com/publications.html
}}
==In Progress==

* [[Persuasion in practical argument using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks]] (in progress)
* [[Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports]]

==Soon==
* [[Automatic argumentation detection and its role in law and the Semantic Web]]

==To review/improve==

* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
* [[Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination]]

==Summaries I mean to write:==
==Argumentation==

* [[A legal case OWL ontology with an instantiation of Popov v. Hayashi]]
* [[A speech act theory of metadiscourse]]
* [[An ontology in OWL for legal case-based reasoning]]

* K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. [[Justifying practical reasoning]]. In F. Grasso, C. Reed, and G. Carenini, editors, Proc. of the 4th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, pages 87-90, Valencia, Spain, 2004. http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~katie/cmna04.pdf
* Rudy Prabowo, Michael Thelwall, Iina Hellsten, and Andrea Scharnhorst. [[Evolving debate in online communication: A graph analytical approach]]. Internet Research, 18(5):520{540, 2008.
* Rudy Prabowo and Mike Thelwall. [[Finding and tracking subjects within an ongoing debate]]. Journal of Informetrics, 2(2):107-127, 2008.

* [[Three senses of argument]]
* [[From arguments in natural language to argumentation frameworks]]
* Peter McBurney, David Hitchcock, and Simon Parsons. [[The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue]]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95-132, 2007.
* Raquel Fern�andez and Ulle Endriss. [[Abstract models for dialogue protocols]]. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 16(2):121-140, 2007
* [[Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text]]

* [[From policy-making statements to first-order logic]]
* [[Argument mining from RADB and its usage in arguing agents and intelligent tutoring system]]
* [[A first step towards argument mining and its use in arguing agents and its]]
* [[Approaches to text mining arguments from legal cases]]
* [[On the exploration and exploitation of structural similarities in argumentative discourses]]
* [[Semantic models for policy deliberation]]
* [[Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases]]
* [[Multi-agent based classification using argumentation From experience]]
* [[Towards annotating and extracting textual legal case elements]]
* [[Argumentation semantics of communicative action]]
* Fréard, D., Denis, A., Détienne, F., Baker, M., Quignard, M., & Barcellini, F. (2010, August 25). [[The role of argumentation in online epistemic communities: The anatomy of a conflict in Wikipedia]]. Retrieved February 28, 2011, from http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00516994/en/
* d’Astous, P., De ́tienne, F., Robillard, P.N., Visser, W., 2001. [[Quantitative measurements of the influence of participants’ roles during peer review meetings]]. Empirical Software Engineering 6, 143–159.
* Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P., 2002. [[Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team communication]]. Design Studies 23 (5), 473–496.

==Persuasion==
* [[Persuasion detection in conversation]], Henry T. Gilbert, I. V., Master's thesis at Naval Postgraduate School, 2010.

==Wikipedia==
*[[Information quality work organization in Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia]]

*[[Wikipedian self-governance in action: Motivating the policy lens]]
*[[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]

===Deletion===
* S. K. Lam, J. Karim, and J. Riedl. [[The effects of group composition on decision quality in a social production community]]. In GROUP, pages 55–64, 2010. (decision quality for deletion)
* S. T. K. Lam and J. Riedl. [[Is Wikipedia growing a longer tail?]] In GROUP, pages 105–114, 2009. (overall reasons for deletion)
* D. Taraborelli and G. L. Ciampaglia. [[Beyond notability: Collective deliberation on content inclusion in Wikipedia]]. In Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops (SASOW), 2010.

===Talk pages===
* [[Talk before you type: Coordination in Wikipedia]]

==Other==

*[[The Semantic Web]]
*[[Which semantic web?]]
*[[The Social Semantic Web]]
*[[CiTO, the Citation Typing Ontology, and its use for annotation of reference lists and visualization of citation networks]]
*[[A network-based approach to text handling for the online scientific community]]
*[[Content-centered discussion mapping]]
*[[Study Supreme Court decision making with Linked Data]]
*Bates, Marcia J. "[[The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface.]]" Online Review 13 (October 1989): 407-424. http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/bates/berrypicking.html
*[[Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science]]
* Bates, Marcia J. "[[Search techniques]]." Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 16 (1981): 139-169.
* Paul Groth, Andrew Gibson, Jan Velterop (2010) [[The anatomy of a nanopublication]], 51-56. In Information Services & Use. http://www.mendeley.com/download/public/229912/3663016892/83f47cdc6d3cc086521abaac154a8f302a8c1587/dl.pdf
* Mons, Barend; van Haagen, Herman; Chichester, Christine; Hoen, Peter-Bram 't; den Dunnen, Johan T; van Ommen, Gertjan; van Mulligen, Erik; Singh, Bharat et al. (2011). "[[The value of data]]". Nature Genetics 43 (4): 281–283. doi:10.1038/ng0411-281. ISSN 1061-4036.

==Toolkit==
* List of [[Special:AllPages|all main namespace pages]]
* List of [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=4|all AcaWiki namespace pages]
* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula forumulas in wiki LaTeX]
* File bugs to [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wikimedia&component=AcaWiki Bugzilla]
* List of [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance%20desc&bug_status=__open__&product=Wikimedia&content=acawiki&list_id=3425 Open Bugs and Feature Requests].
* [[Template:Welcome]]
* [[Special:Version|What runs AcaWiki]]
* [[AcaWiki:Related people and groups]]
* [http://acawiki.org/Special:Ask?title=Special%3AAsk&q=[[DOI%3A%3A%2B]] semantic search example]
* [[Special:Userrights]]
* [[Special:SpecialPages]]
Deprecated:
* [[AcaWiki:Bugs]] and [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ issue tracker] (note: as of 2011-02-14, put please add nkinkade or nyergler as nosy on any ticket you create in the tracker)

My lists:
* [[User:Jodi.a.schneider/OfInterest|OfInterest]]

Lists I want:
* List of everything missing a URL -- with a way to indicate I've looked for a preprint/open access copy
* List of everything missing a DOI -- with a way to indicate I've searched for one
* List of images with unmarked copyright status (all of them at the moment)
* List of everything without at least one tag, maybe use [[Property:Tag]]

Other
* Ability to mark a journal openaccess, the entire run (could cause problems for time-dependent/articlebyarticle OA

Related projects and possible collaborators
* See http://mathoverflow.net/questions/13619/ (particularly [http://mathoverflow.net/users/1441/anton-petrunin Anton Petrunin])
** [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/ r-forum] (proposed project [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1&page=1#Item_0 description]
** [Ncat] - a math wiki for notes, may have some summaries, e.g. http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Categories+and+Sheaves and http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Topological+Quantum+Field+Theories+from+Compact+Lie+Groups
** [http://www.wikademic.org/ Wikademic] (some past discussion with Yossi Farjoun)
** [http://math-arch.org/] -- comments on math arXiv posts
* [http://researchblogging.org/ Research Blogging] is distributed and more opinionated, focusing on blog posts
* [http://www.bibdex.com/ bibdex] Allows private groups (Sunir Shah)

==Summaries Added==

==Argumentation==
* [[Argument Blogging]]
* [[Argument research corpus]]
* [[A computational model of argumentation in everyday conversation: A problem-centred approach]]
* [[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]]
* [[Expressing Argumentative Discussions in Social Media Sites]] - done
* [[Providing argument support for e-participation]]
* [[Spatial hypertext: An alternative to navigational and semantic links]]
* [[A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation]]
* [[Back to the future: Dimensions revisited]]
* [[Bottom-up argumentation]]
* [[Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis]]

==Systems & Projects==
* [[But, see, accord: Generating "Blue Book" citations in HYPO]]
*[[Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis]]
* [[Zest: Discussion mapping for mailing lists]]
* [[Value-based argumentation for democratic decision support]] (Parmenides)
===IMPACT project===
* [[Towards a structured online consultation tool]]
* [[A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making]]
* [[Towards Web-based mass argumentation in natural language]]

===IBIS===
*[[IBIS--a convincing concept...but a lousy instrument]]
* [[Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 Years on from gIBIS and QOC]]

===ScholOnto===
* [[Ontological foundations for scholarly debate mapping technology]]
* [[Modelling discourse in contested domains: A semiotic and cognitive framework]]
* [[Modeling naturalistic argumentation in research literatures: Representation and interaction design issues]]

===WWAW===
*[[Mass argumentation and the semantic web]]
*[[Towards an argument interchange format]]

===Argument Zoning===
(publication order)
* [[Task-based evaluation of summary quality: Describing relationships between scientific papers]]
* [[An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles]]
* [[Discourse-level argumentation in scientific articles: Human and automatic annotation.]]
* [[What's yours and what's mine: Determining intellectual attribution in scientific text]]
* [[Argumentative Zoning for improved citation indexing]]
* [[Towards discipline-independent argumentative zoning: Evidence from chemistry and computational linguistics]]

====Work primarily based on Argument Zoning====
=====Legal domain=====
* [[Summarising legal texts: Sentential tense and argumentative roles]]
* [[Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts]]
* [[Study on sentence relations in the automatic detection of argumentation in legal cases]] -- really uses argument zoning little to not at all

=====Scientific papers=====
* [[Ontology-based modelling of related work sections in research articles: Using CRFs for developing semantic data based information retrieval systems]]

===Barcellini's studies of the Python community===
*[[Participation in online interaction spaces: Design-use mediation in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[User and developer mediation in an Open Source Software community: Boundary spanning through cross participation in online discussions]]
*[[A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[A study of online discussion in an Open-Source community: reconstructing thematic coherence and argumentation from quotation practices]]
*[[Thematic coherence and quotation practices in OSS design-oriented online discussions]]

===Online argumentation===

==Frameworks and ontologies==
*[[An abstract framework for modeling argumentation in virtual communities]]
*[[Adding provenance and evolution information to modularized argumentation models]]
*[[Expressing argumentative discussions in social media sites]]

==Systems==
*[[Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 argumentation]] -- good discussion of what existing argumentation tools are lacking

*[[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]] -- dispute-resolution

==Linguistics==

===Argumentation Mining===
====Stance====
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]
* [[Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges]]

===Focus on Corpus Construction & Features Analysis for Machine Learning===
* [[How can you say such things?!?: Recognizing disagreement in informal political argument]] -- forum posts
* [[Cats rule and dogs drool!: Classifying stance in online debate]] -- debate systems (e.g. ConvinceMe)
** Journal version: [[That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate]]

====Persuasion====
* [[A microtext corpus for persuasion detection in dialog]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]

===Sentiment Analysis===
* [[Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews]]
* [[Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree]]

===Focus on Discourse Analysis===
*[[Leave a reply: An analysis of weblog comments]]

===Social Experiments===
*[[Social validation of collective annotations: Definition and experiment]] - annotation

===Power===
*[[Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums]]

==Discourse Structures==
* [[Analyzing Discourse Structure to Coordinate Educational Forums]]

===Rhetorical Relations===
* [[Discourse-marking of concession and contrast in asynchronous online discussion]]
* [[Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: An assessment]]

==Semantic Web==
*[[Implementing Semantic Web applications: reference architecture and challenges]]

==Social Semantic Web==
*[[Produce and Consume Linked Data with Drupal!]]
*[[What Would It Mean to Blog on the Semantic Web?]]

==HCI & CSCW==
*[[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers]]
*[[FeedWinnower: layering structures over collections of information streams]]
* [[What is social informatics and why does it matter?]]
* [[Participatory mashups: Using users to make data mashable]]
* [[Seven privacy worries in ubiquitous social computing]]

==Health==
*[[Self-Control Relies on Glucose as a Limited Energy Source: Willpower Is More Than a Metaphor]]
*[[Predicting adverse drug events using pharmacological network models]]

==Ireland==
* [[The extent of clientelism in Irish politics: Evidence from classifying Dáil questions on a local-national dimension]]

==Scientific Communication, Scholarly Publishing==
*[[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
*[[How to Review a Paper]]
* [[A wiki for Mizar: Motivation, considerations, and initial prototype]]
* [[New scenarios in scholarly publishing and debate]]
* [[Semantic Web and Social Web heading towards living documents in the life sciences]]

==Twitter==
* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms]]
* [[Unsupervised modeling of Twitter conversations]]
* [[Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining]]

===ICWSM 2010===
* [[Characterizing microblogs with topic models]]
* [[From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series]]
* [[Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks]]
* [[Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy]]
* [[Microblogging inside and outside the workplace]]
* [[Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment]]

==Wikipedia summaries==
* [[Beyond Wikipedia: Coordination and conflict in online production groups]]
* [[Readers are not free-riders: Reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia]]
* [[What Wikipedia deletes: Characterizing dangerous collaborative content]]
* [[Enhancing Wikipedia with semantic technologies]] (for Research Newsleter)
* [[Biographical social networks on Wikipedia - A cross-cultural study of links that made history]]

===Talk pages===
* [[Behind the article: Recognizing dialog acts in Wikipedia talk pages]]
* [[There is no deadline - Time evolution of Wikipedia discussions]]

===Wikimania 2010 summaries===
* [[Judicial citation to Wikipedia in published federal court opinions]]
* [[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]
* [[Wikipedia leeches? The promotion of traffic through a collaborative web format]]

==General information science==
*[[Idea tactics]]
*[[Information search tactics]]

<hr>
==Summaries I might write if somebody else doesn't do it first:==
* [[The rhetorical parsing, summarization, and generation of natural language texts]]
* [[Construction of disambiguated folksonomy ontologies using Wikipedia]]
* Antoine Isaac & Ed Summers (ed), [[SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System primer]], W3C Working Group Note (2009), especially the Appendix "Correspondences between ISO-2788/5964 and SKOS constructs"
* Alistair Miles & Brian Matthews, [[Review of RDF thesaurus work]] (SWAD-Europe Project deliverable)
* Brian Matthews, Alistair Miles & Michael Wilson, "[[Modelling thesauri for the Semantic Web]]", submission to workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (2003)
* Various articles on information quality from the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RENDER_Bibliography RENDER bibliography]
* Robert Sanderson, Benjamin Albritton, Rafael Schwemmer, and Herbert Van de Sompel. SharedCanvas: a collaborative model for medieval manuscript layout dissemination. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998111 JCDL 2011, uses Linked Data to help present manuscripts
* David Bamman and Gregory Crane. 2011. Measuring historical word sense variation. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998078 JCDL 2011, uses corpus statistics to automatically identify word sense variation in Latin:

==Articles I'd like somebody else to summarize:==
* [[The role of mentorship in protege performance]]
* [[Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions]]
* The five most influential papers in usability (see [http://www.measuringusability.com/blog/five-papers.php list]:
:** [[Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think]]
:** [[Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces]]
:** [[Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods]]
:** [[Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough?]]
:** [[Do usability evaluators agree on what usability problems are?]]
:Also their runners-up:
:** [[Tutorials for the first-time computer user]]
:** [[Human factors and usability]]
:** [[Testing small system customer setup]]
:** [[A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems]]
:** [[The evaluator effect in usability tests]]
* stuff from Jeff Jarvis' [http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/07/07/publicness-bibliography/ Publicness bibliography]
* [[Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology‎]]
* [[The collapse of complex societies]] (see [http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/04/the-collapse-of-complex-business-models/ Shirky's summary])
* [[Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis]]

* via http://himsit.com/musings/facebook/
** James Coleman’s [[Social capital in the creation of human capital]]
** Robert Putnam’s [[Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital]]
** [[Impact of state-level social capital on the emergence of virtual communities]]
** [[The productivity paradox of information technology]] [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632 DOI full-text]

* Psychology
** [[False-Positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant]]

Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums

2012-10-03T10:16:25Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums
|authors=Marc Tomlinson and David B. Bracewell and Mary Draper and Zewar Almissour and Ying Shi and Jeremy Bensley
|url=http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/1036_Paper.pdf
|tags=online argumentation, Arabic, power, social relationships, computational linguistics,
|summary=The authors analyzed an Arabic discussion forum called WikiTalk, annotating attributes that they say relate to "ten psychologically motivated social acts" derived from from Keltner et al. (2008)

===Social Acts===
# Establish Credibility
# Challenge Credibility
# Establish Solidarity
# Managerial Inﬂuence
# Group Affordance
# Agreement
# Disagreement
# Task Conflict
# Relationships Conflict
# Leadership Avoidance

===Attributes for each social attribute===
(directly quoted from paper, in the main)
====Establish Credibility====
# Explicit statements of authority: Asserting a degree or title
# Motivation: Providing motivation to the group for an idea or action
# Providing answers: Answering questions poised by group members.
# Providing cited information: Statement made by an individual citing source information.
# Justifying opinion: Providing justiﬁcation of a stated opinion.

====Challenge Credibility====
# aggressive/accusing questions: question target‘s credential directly.
# gossiping: question target‘s credential behind his back, with no direct evidence.
# demands to prove credibility:ask for hard facts/proof.
# bait and switch: ﬁrst agree then point out ﬂaws or
ways to improve.

====Establish Solidarity====
# Introduction to group: Speaker identiﬁes him/herself during ﬁrst time in a group.
# Establish bona ﬁdes: Speaker establishes good faith with group by stating good intentions or offering help.
# In group jargon: Speaker uses group-speciﬁc words orhrases that have special meanings.
# Disclose personal data: Speaker gives personal information about him/herself to the rest of the group.
# Disclose beliefs: Speaker shares his/her belief aboutomething in order to establish solidarity with the restf the group
# Ask for a favor: Speaker asks other members of theroup to help him/her out.
# Address fallout/conﬂict: Speaker addresses a past,resent, or potential future conﬂict within the groupnd states his/her intention to move beyond it (makingeace).
# Identify allies: Speaker identiﬁes an ally common toroup members; ally may be inside (must be marginalized) or outside the group.
# Identify opponents: Speaker identiﬁes an opponentommon to group members; opponent may be insider outside the group.

====Managerial Inﬂuence====
# goal: goal to be accomplished by the person acquiring power.
# reasoning with facts: using facts to sway an argument.
# ﬂattery and good will: using ﬂattery to sway an argument.
# coalition: mobilization of other people.
# bargaining: negotiation through exchange of beneﬁts.
# assertiveness: direct and forceful commands.
# higher authority: support from higher authority in the organization.
# rewards: offering rewards to individuals.
# punishment: threatening to punish another individual.

====Group Affordance====
# honorable titles: Speaker uses an honorable title to refer to an individual.
# respectful sentiments: Speaker uses language containing respectful words.
# yielding to another person out of respect: Speakers yields to another individual.
# Order Conﬁrmation: Speaker agrees to do something for target

====Agreement====
# Agreement: Speaker uses language explicitly agreeing with another individual.

====Disagreement====
# Disagreement: Speaker uses language explicitly disagreeing with another individual.

====Task Conflict====
# Task Conﬂict: Speaker uses language indicating conﬂict with another individual over task details.

====Relationships Conflict====
# Relationship Conﬂict: Speaker uses language indicating conﬂict with another individual over personal details.
====Leadership Avoidance====
# Order negation: explicitly avoid making a decision.

==References==

===Theory===
* D. Keltner, G.A. A Van Kleef, Serena Chen, and M.W. W Kraus. 2008. [[A reciprocal inﬂuence model of social power: Emerging principles and lines of inquiry]]. Advances in experimental social psychology, 40:151–192.

===Corpora & NLP===
* Oya Aran, Hayley Hung, and D. Gatica-Perez. 2010. [[A multimodal corpus for studying dominance in small group conversations]]. In Proc. LREC workshop on Multimodal Corpora, Malta.

* P Bramsen, M. Escobar-Molana, A. Patel, and R Alonso. 2011. [[Extracting social power relationships from natural language]]. Proceedings of ACL HLT, pages 773–782.

* S. Shaikh, T. Strzalkowski, and A. Broadwell. 2010. [[MPC: A multi-party chat corpus for modeling social phenomena in discourse]]. Proc. LREC-2010, pages 2007–2013.

==See also==
===Wikipedia===
* [[Detecting authority bids in online discussions]]
* [[Negotiating with angry mastodons: The Wikipedia policy environment as genre ecology]]
* [["What I know is...": Establishing credibility on Wikipedia talk pages]]
|relevance=* Provides a corpus in Arabic for "identifying individuals pursuing power within on-line forums"
* Relevant for cross-cultural studies -- see Figure 3 which points in this direction
|journal=LREC
|pub_date=2012
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums

2012-10-03T10:04:51Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Created page with "{{Summary |title=Pursing power in Arabic on-line discussion forums |authors=Marc Tomlinson and David B. Bracewell and Mary Draper and Zewar Almissour and Ying Shi and Jeremy Ben..."

User talk:Jayvdb

2012-08-31T09:47:59Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

===Empty lit review===
Hi John, Thanks for your [[User_talk:Jodi.a.schneider#Empty_lit_review|comment]] about the empty lit review. I deleted it and added the topic to the lit review wishlist. If you notice anything else, please let me know. [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 11:47, 31 August 2012 (CEST)

===Speedy deletion nominations===
So far we don't have anybody watching these. I really appreciate your work on de-spamming, since I'm starting thesis writing I've let go of watching the change log daily/weekly. Would you like admin rights, might be more efficient? [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 11:47, 31 August 2012 (CEST)

User talk:Jayvdb

2012-08-31T09:47:45Z

Jodi.a.schneider: thanks! :)

Hi John, Thanks for your [[User_talk:Jodi.a.schneider#Empty_lit_review|comment]] about the empty lit review. I deleted it and added the topic to the lit review wishlist. If you notice anything else, please let me know. [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 11:47, 31 August 2012 (CEST)

===Speedy deletion nominations===
So far we don't have anybody watching these. I really appreciate your work on de-spamming, since I'm starting thesis writing I've let go of watching the change log daily/weekly. Would you like admin rights, might be more efficient? [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 11:47, 31 August 2012 (CEST)

User talk:Jodi.a.schneider

2012-08-31T09:44:03Z

Jodi.a.schneider: /* Empty lit review */

== Hi! ==

Welcome. 22:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

----
Here's a template:

{{welcome|Name=Jodi}}

== How to fave a page ==

Hi Jodi,
i was just checking out some of your design features and noticed that [[Predecessors of preprint servers]] was labeled "Summary favorited 0 times". I wanted to try this feature and fave the page but couldn't see how to do it — can you please give me a hint? Thanks! --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 10:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Daniel! It's a bit tricky at the moment. Go to your own user page, edit it, and add the title of the page in the line called Favorites. Hopefully in the future you'll be able to add a Favorite right on the page itself! [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 14:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

:Thanks for the hint — hadn't seen that before. An alternative to do this would be something like [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Predecessors_of_preprint_servers&curid=405&diff=2169&oldid=2135 this] but you seem to have deprecated the use of categories. I also saw no "undo" for this edit, not sure whether that can really be regarded as a feature. And the captcha for adding diff links from AcaWiki is disturbing. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 14:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

::Yeah, categories could be useful in that regard. Not sure what you mean about the undo. Where did you expect that?

::You're not the first person to remark about the captcha. We need to revisit that, though I think it does deter spam links. Do you mean that you're getting a captcha when you're adding links from AcaWiki itself? Haven't experienced that myself, but that would be a crucial fix, if so.

::Thanks, Daniel, for your comments. I'm moving to Ireland tonight so I'll be out of touch for the next few days, but do keep the comments coming. Do you also know about our mailing lists, etc, on [[AcaWiki:Communications]]? [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 16:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

:::As for the undo, dunno what my problem was — probably just oversight on my part.
:::Re: Captcha: The link I provided in my previous message is to a page diff on AcaWiki. I entered it without using plainlinks formatting, and it was thus handled like external links. That is annoying. --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 21:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

== Summary requests? ==

Hi Jodi,

I am wondering if there has been any thought about a place to post summary or literature review requests? Might be nice to encourage faster reviews of new and/or popular research papers.

:Good idea! I've added a [[AcaWiki:Literature_Reviews#Requested_Literature_Reviews|section]] on the [[AcaWiki:Literature_Reviews|literature review page]]. [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 12:33, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

----

== Zotero ==

I have 300 or so articles summaries I am interested in uploading in the next few months. Everything is currently in Zotero but I'm interested in moving out.

Moving moving through BibTex seems like an unnecessary and unnecessary fault-prone step. I have written Zotero style files before and should be able to write one for the AcaWiki template syntax so that folks can just 'Alt-Q' and paste formatted Zotero entries in. Maybe I can even write a Zotero plugin so folks can just share/create directly from within Zotero. Since I'm planning on doing this a few hundred times, it seems like investing a little time up front would be useful.

I have a questions:

* Do you know of anyone else who has worked on Zotero/AcaWiki integration. I could find anything searching around but I thought I would ask.
* Is there documentation on the syntax/form that AcaWiki is storing stuff in. Is the cite using Semantic Mediawiki? Where can I find documentation.

Thanks in advance for any help! Please leave me a comment on my talk page. -- [[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|Benjamin Mako Hill]] 21:06, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

:The closest I know of is [http://clinical.uthscsa.edu/cite/ http://clinical.uthscsa.edu/cite/] — neither Zotero nor specifically AcaWiki. I would be interested in helping out, since integration with wikis would make Zotero much more interesting to me (I am currently with [http://mekentosj.com/papers/ Papers] for the desktop, [http://www.mendeley.com/ Mendeley] online). --[[User:Daniel Mietchen|Daniel Mietchen]] 09:10, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

:I'm happy to upload the CSL file into Zotero and I'm sure they'll be happy to have it. I would like someone else here to use it and check it out first though. I just tried to install it on a new computer and realized that the published version is missing a fix I must have made on my normal laptop that includes listing whether the journal is open access or not. I've tried to look through the [[Template:Summary|summary template]] to add new fields to the documentation/example code part that is actually in the renderer since that's what I looked mistakeningly thinking that the documentation portion was up to date. I think it's pretty good now but I'd like to see someone else using this before I bother putting it in Zotero core where I'll start being bound by their release cycle going forward. —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 22:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
:: I used it to create [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]. I didn't notice any problems. I'm a big Zotero user so this will definitely encourage me to add more papers to AcaWiki! Listing whether a journal is open access or not would defnitely be useful.

::Hmm, is it AcaWiki documentation that's not up-to-date? I'm just volunteering now, between Ph.D. studies, but I'd like to help keep stuff up to date, so let me know if there's something that should be fixed. Don't quite get what you're saying about the renderer, but would like to understand... All your suggestions have been really helpful![[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 22:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

:::The documentation issue was just that a bunch of the fields being generated by the form where not displayed in the "example" documentation part of the template on [[Template:Summary]]. I am not super good at reading Medaiwiki templates but I ''think'' I just added the missing ones. I also just updated my CSL file so that it automatically generates the '''relevance''' field and the '''pub_open_access''' in the template. Try it out! I think it's working pretty well.

:::I really appreciate all your help. I only contacted you because you were the only person that I saw who was active based on the recent [[Special:RecentChanges|recent changes page]] so I figured you might be able to help point me in the right directions. And you were! :) Thanks again for all your help! —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 00:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

::::The CSL rocks. I just used the updated version to add [[FeedWinnower: layering structures over collections of information streams]], and it did autogenerate '''relevance''' and '''pub_open_access''. This makes it *way* easier to add summaries. Yeah!
::::As for documentation--cool, glad you could figure out what was missing! Thanks for adding it! [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 12:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

== Add User Form ==

The add user form mentions "Institution, City, State". Probably this should be (or include!) country, no? If I could see links to edit the form text myself, I would do it myself. --[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|Benjamin Mako Hill]] 21:11, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Good point, Benjamin! I've added Country. (The form can be edited at [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=AcaWiki:User&action=edit] by the way.) Next question: what should we put in place of State? Discuss at [[AcaWiki_talk:User]]. [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 11:36, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
::State/Province is probably fine. It doesn't always fit but people will know what to do with it. —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 16:55, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
:::Fair enough. Changed State to State/Province. [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 23:51, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

== Database dumps ==

I'm adding (what seems to me!) a largish amount of content to Acawiki and am slightly paranoid about things like backups and making sure that data is available going forward.

Regardless of Acawiki's own backup solutions (which I'd be interested in hearing about), do you think it would be possible to publish full Mediawiki database dumps so that community members and other people can download and keep their own copies? You can follow [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki#Database_dump these instructions] and it seems like that a simple cronjob would probably do the trick! Let me know! —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]]
:I should add. If you want a volunteer to do this, and are happy to give me access, I'd be happy to set this up myself. —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 16:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
::hey Mako, there are [http://acawiki.org/rdf/acawiki.rdf RDF XML dumps] and [http://acawiki.org/dump/acawiki.xml MW XML dumps]. I think we just need a page pointing to them, to make them findable. Let me know how it goes, using the dumps. [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 23:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, added info at [[AcaWiki:Database Dumps]]. :) [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 23:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
:Awesome! Thanks! Are these being called from a cronjob automatically? How often are they being made? —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 15:27, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
:: Daily cronjob, if I understand correctly. [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 15:28, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

== Errors and Slowness ==

Two issues. The first is that Acawiki has been ''incredibly'' slow and flaky over the last couple weeks. I've often had to reload/resubmit pages 3-4 times in order to get one to go through without timing out. It's bad for viewing and particularly bad for submission. It feels to me like the server is under high load or not coping. If that is in fact the case, I can probably help out with hosting. The actual utilization of the site seems extremely minimal. Who should I talk to about this.

: Hey Mako, I filed this as http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/issue593 , I've been having similar issues. [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 18:16, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

As a more particular, issue, I've found that I'm not able to upload SVGs to the site. I uploaded [[File:Mcgrath_typology_of_tasks.svg]] and got this error:

:Error creating thumbnail: sh: wmf2eps: command not found
:convert: Delegate failed `"wmf2eps" -o "%o" "%i"'.
:convert: unable to open image `/tmp/magick-XXi6wgkN': No such file or directory.
:convert: unable to load module `/usr/lib/ImageMagick-6.3.7/modules-Q16/coders/svg.la': file not found.
:convert: UnableToOpenBlob `/tmp/magick-XXi6wgkN': No such file or directory.
:convert: missing an image filename `PNG:/var/www/acawiki.org/www/images/thumb/b/be/Mcgrath_typology_of_tasks.svg/716px-Mcgrath_typology_of_tasks.svg.png'.

I hope you can help! —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 17:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

: Thanks again! Reported this one, too: http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/issue594 [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 18:30, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

::Awesome. Thanks for helping out with both. It's really making contributing difficult at the moment. I just uploaded another SVG. Hopefully, this will get worked out soon. —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 20:31, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

::'''Update!''' I just spent an hour or so with ''nkinakde'' (the CC sysadmin) on IRC and had him work through basically all the issues I've been having. (1) SVGs are fixed. (2) The slowness seemed to have to do with the parser cache being turned off (!) due to some semantic mediawiki calendar stuff that Creative Commons was doing on a different wiki. It's been address here so we should be in the clear. (3) I had him turn off the CAPTCHA for users who have confirmed over email. It doesn't really fix the issue that the site is treating changes to category or subject as an external link, but it mean that users like myself don't have to keep solving hundreds of CAPTCHAs. The site is working ''much'' better for me. —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 22:47, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

:::Thanks for that! I really appreciate the work you're putting into this! Great thing about CAPTCHA's--that's completely sensible! Unfortunately, I can't upload images at all at the moment, have put in a bug about that: http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/issue595 [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 11:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

::::I can't reproduce this. I uploaded 2-3 images ''after'' we made the changes and I just uploaded [[Media:Mako_suit4-280px.png|another one]] now. Try a different <strike>image</strike> browser? —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 13:36, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

== Article naming standard ==

I've been struggling with the title of summary articles as I've been uploading a bunch of new articles. I'm not really happy with any of the options but have come to the conclusions but think that the only truly bad standard is no standard at all -- exactly what we have now.

Can you check out [[AcaWiki:Article naming|my proposal to move to standardize on sentence case]] and let me know what you think? —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 22:43, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

== Protected pages and empty summary articles ==

A couple more issues that (now that the site is snappy!) I thought I'd be bring up.

# There are a few protected pages that I'd like to be able to edit. [[AcaWiki:FAQ]] is one. [[AcaWiki:Posting Guidelines]] is another (I'd like to remove the 300-700 word thing or at least change it to say that the core of the article should be that long. Book summaries could -- and maybe ''should'' -- be much longer, even if we don't have great metadata support for them yet.
# There are a bunch of essentially empty summaries on the site. I guess they were created to test the uploading framework? I think we should probably delete these. I use [[wikipedia:WP:REDLINKS|red links]] to articles to point out that there isn't a summary on it yet. I can think of arguments for keeping them but think that, on balance, it's probably better not to have them. If you disagree strongly, maybe we can consider some category-based scheme for noting which summaries are just shells.

I could do either of these things myself if I had a bureaucrat bit. Would it be worth getting one? Who could set that up? —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User_talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 22:54, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

: Yeah, you should definitely have a bureaucrat bit. nkinkade is probably the best person to help with that.

:I disagree about empty summaries, because it's still a pain to upload metadata. For myself, I've been adding metadata first, then going back to add summaries. But you're right, there's a problem with the current setup.

:I think it would be great to have a category for these, and advertise them as "summary wanted". Daniel Mitchen had [http://acawiki.org/User_talk:Daniel_Mietchen#Thanks_for_the_BibTeX_Import_Comments.21|suggested] a template. That would be one way to go. A few were hand tagged "needs summary" but automating is definitely necessary! [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 11:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

== Copyright Status for Images ==

Hi! I've noticed that you've started uploading figures for articles as well. As you know, I've begun to do this and I think it's a great way to improve articles!

I noticed that at least some of your articles (e.g., [[Media:Groza2009DocumentFramework.png]]) see to be "screenshots" taken right from the article. If you take these, we should make sure we have permission to use these and to relicense them under CC BY-SA or under a compatible [[:wikipedia:free cultural work|free culture]] license. I know that Open CourseWare spends a huge amount of time and money reproducing figures and tables from academic papers so that they can use them without copyright so this is something we should probably be careful about.

If you are uploading a picture, it might be useful to explain the page and description (1) where it came from and (2) if you are the copyright holder. If you are not, you should either explain (and link to "proof") that the paper is under a open access/free culture license or include a note or reference to the fact that you have permission from the copyright holder. You can take a look at Wikimedia Commons [http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/COM:L licensing policy]] for a good example of something we might want to follow.

So far, I've re-made all the figures I've uploaded and (I think!) I've noted that in each description. —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 20:08, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

: Yes, this is a good thing to think about.

: These images are appropriate under [http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html Fair use] (small part of the entire article, and is used for educational purposes, the images are not available commercially, as single entities). I don't see this as a copyright ''problem''.

: However, it is a free culture ''opportunity''. I would support creation of a policy and templates. For instance, we could create templates to indicate the copyright status of each image, and to encourage the remaking of images. (The image that you point to could certain be remade, but I don't have appropriate tools to do that quickly. I generally don't have time or patience for remaking images; I'd welcome others doing that!)

: Wikimedia Commons is designed as a general source for free images; that's quite useful, but I don't think that's our goal. It may also be worth looking at Wikipedia, which takes a far less constraining view.
On Wikipedia, there are non-free images, used in the context of a particular article.

: Under [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fair_use Wikipedia's Fair Use policy], a copyright tag and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Non-free_use_rationale non-free use rationale] would be needed; those seem like good habits. The image that you point to would probably be recreated under the question "Can this non-free content be replaced by a free version that has the same effect?" [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 09:25, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

::I don't think this we should rely on fair use unless we absolutely have to.

::* Including non-free content when it's not absolutely necessary complicates the licensing of content on AW and makes AW less free. In Wikipedia, this is acceptable because there are things like album covers, corporate logos, and other content which ''can not be replaced'' and which is necessary for a good encyclopedic article. I am very familiar with [[:wikipedia:Wikipedia:Fair_use|Wikipedia's policy toward non-free content]] and have uploaded quite a bit of content to WP under those terms (and some deleted!). I don't think they apply to any of the figures in question or anything on AW at the moment.
::* What is fair use for AW (as a non-profit) may not be fair use for someone who wanted to re-use AW content by printing it in books, course-guides, or other places in ways they could otherwise do under [[AcaWiki:Licensing|our license]]. We want our content to be reused in those places and this will, at the very least, create uncertainty, extra work, or a barrier to doing so.
::* Fair use is US-specific (there are international analogs many places) and can internationalize awkwardly.
::* Reproducing the content in question is not only possible, but reasonably easy, as you point out.
::* Finally, we should look more to groups like OCW rather than Wikipedia which is more similar. OCW will blur out and remove figures and tables in slides in the background of lecture videos and spends huge amount of money to reproduce free version of tables and figures! I've talked to OCW people, and their lawyers, and understand that they have not entered into this decision lightly.
::Lawyers have argued that academic, non-profit, reproduction of ''full abstracts'' is fair use! If our goal was to take a stand for strong fair use of existing content, we wouldn't be bothering with republishing summaries. Let's take a strong position in favor of creating unambiguously freely licensed content. Indeed, that seems to be the whole point. —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 15:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

:::Abstracts are not summaries, and fair use ''is'' part of the point for me. So I disagree with the overall argument that you are making. But you're right: for widescale reuse of AcaWiki, uniform licensing would be easier (motivated in part by http://scienceblogs.com/commonknowledge/2010/06/open_data_and_creative_commons.php ). There's a tension between ease of reuse and ease of creation/ingest. The notion of blurring out content and removing figures and tables in slides feels wrong to me, while I understand the point behind it for OCW, it strikes me as censorship by licensing. How is this different from asking reusers to replace images with [file redacted] or something similar?
:::Regarding this point:
:::* Reproducing the content in question is not only possible, but reasonably easy, as you point out.
:::I point out that it would be reasonably easy in theory--for someone who knew what they were doing and had the right tools--at the same time as I explain that that's NOT at all easy for me at the moment. Also, beware of generalizing from this one example. It would require a review of all the images in the File space to understand whether they're all as easy to reproduce as this one. Screenshots of prototype systems, results of queries--these are not so easy to reproduce.
:::Right now I see three pillars for images on AcaWiki:
:::# Rhetorical expression of the point to be made
:::# Appropriate licensing (fair use, free license, etc)
:::# Balance ease for the summarizer and ease for the reuser
:::I'll keep thinking about this, and I think a wider discussion on the mailing list would be beneficial. [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 17:27, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
{{talkback|Benjamin Mako Hill}}

== Subject listing ==

How do I add possible subjects. There are a few obvious ones that are missing that should be there (and that I need!) that include '''Law''' and '''History'''. —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 21:12, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

== Collective intelligence ==

Here's a summary of [[Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups]] -- the paper on collective intelligence published in Science a couple months ago. —[[User:Benjamin Mako Hill|mako]][[User talk:Benjamin Mako Hill|๛]] 18:11, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

== Empty lit review ==

Hi, I think [[Literature Review:Smoking Cessation among Male Smokers in Saudi Arabia]] should be deleted; its inflating the litreview stats and I doubt anyone is going to pick up the challenge to complete this page. It looks bad if one of the three litreviews has been empty since 2009. [[User:Jayvdb|Jayvdb]] 05:06, 31 August 2012 (CEST)
: Good point! I deleted it. If you notice other stuff, please let me know! [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 11:42, 31 August 2012 (CEST)
:: Also added it to [[AcaWiki:Literature_Reviews#Requested_Literature_Reviews|requested lit reviews]]. [[User:Jodi.a.schneider|Jodi.a.schneider]] 11:44, 31 August 2012 (CEST)

AcaWiki:Literature Reviews

2012-08-31T09:43:37Z

Jodi.a.schneider: /* Requested Literature Reviews */

From here you can either

* [[Special:AddData/Literature_Review|Post a Literature Review]]
* [[Special:BrowseData/Literature_Review|Browse Literature Reviews]]
* [[AcaWiki:Literature_Reviews#Requested_Literature_Reviews |Request a Literature Review]] (below)

A literature review is a summary of research in a particular field. For example, here is a literature review on [[Literature_Review:Happiness| happiness in psychology.]] Many students write literature reviews for their own research papers, or class assignments. Please feel free to post them here.

Please do not post copyrighted material; you can read our [[Posting Guidelines]].

== Requested Literature Reviews ==

Would you like a literature review on a topic, but don't want to write it yourself? List it here! Click on the name of the topic to add the review.

* [[Literature_Review:Privacy and the Internet|Privacy and the Internet]]
* [[Literature_Review:Social Semantic Web|Social Semantic Web]]
* [[Literature_Review:Text mining|Text mining]]
* [[Literature_Review:Political philosophy and the environment|Political philosophy and the environment]]
* [[Literature_Review:Smoking cessation among male smokers in Saudi Arabia|Smoking cessation among male smokers in Saudi Arabia]]

User talk:Jodi.a.schneider

2012-08-31T09:42:50Z

Jodi.a.schneider: /* Empty lit review */ deleted

Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges

2012-08-14T08:42:26Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges
|authors=C Albert and L Amgoud and F D de Saint-Cyr and P Saint-Dizier and C Costedoat
|url=http://www.aclweb.org/anthology-new/W/W11/W11-3705.pdf
|tags=opinion mining, online argumentation, argumentation mining, argument extraction,
|summary=This paper discusses opinionated, evaluative statements from the perspective of arguments. The hotel domain is the key example.

"very friendly welcome" is interpreted as an argument such as:
"The hotel is good because the staff is very friendly"
"Welcome is good because it is very friendly"

This is then parsed into a conclusion ("the hotel is good", assuming the first interpretation) and a support ("because the staff is very friendly"). We can argue both for and against this conclusion, with other statements.

"The conclusion orientation w.r.t. its attacks and supports reveal the customer preferences and priorities"
|relevance=The authors do not make much of the fact that the opinion needs interpretation to become an argument; this is a key problem in understanding the informal argumentation on the social web.
|journal=Sentiment Analysis where AI meets Psychology (SAAIP)(workshop at IJCNLP'11)
|pub_date=2011
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges

2012-08-14T08:30:59Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Created page with "{{Summary |title=Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges |authors=C Albert and L Amgoud and F D de Saint-Cyr and P Saint-Dizier and C Coste..."

{{Summary
|title=Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges
|authors=C Albert and L Amgoud and F D de Saint-Cyr and P Saint-Dizier and C Costedoat
|tags=opinion mining, online argumentation, argumentation mining, argument extraction,
|summary=This paper discusses opinionated, evaluative statements from the perspective of arguments. The hotel domain is the key example.

"very friendly welcome" is interpreted as an argument such as:
"The hotel is good because the staff is very friendly"
"Welcome is good because it is very friendly"

This is then parsed into a conclusion ("the hotel is good", assuming the first interpretation) and a support ("because the staff is very friendly"). We can argue both for and against this conclusion, with other statements.

"The conclusion orientation w.r.t. its attacks and supports reveal the customer preferences and priorities"
|relevance=The authors do not make much of the fact that the opinion needs interpretation to become an argument; this is a key problem in understanding the informal argumentation on the social web.
|journal=Sentiment Analysis where AI meets Psychology (SAAIP)(workshop at IJCNLP'11)
|pub_date=2011
|subject=Computer Science
}}

That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate

2012-08-14T07:19:43Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate
|authors=Marilyn A. Walker, Pranav Anand, Rob Abbott, Jean E. Fox Tree, Craig Martelly, and Joseph King,
|url=http://users.soe.ucsc.edu/~maw/papers/wassa_article.pdf
|tags=online argumentation, NLP, stance, disagreement, Mechanical Turk, natural language processing, discourse analysis, cue words
|summary=This is a journal submission version of the [[Cats rule and dogs drool!: Classifying stance in online debate]]. It covers 14, rather than 12 topics; has more extensive figures; and further examples. It uses a third machine learning algorithm (SVM using libLinear) and experiments with MinCut. Examples of posts that are difficult to side are particularly helpful.

The authors further examined 386 incorrectly classified posts and indicate that context was needed nearly 30% of the time (6% were pure disagreement without content, 12% needed more context, 12% contained quotations as context but the algorithm took these as verbatim statements of the post). 33% were "qualitatively labeled as 'hard'").

==Selected references==
* Abbott, R., Walker, M., Anand, P., Tree, J., Bowmani, R., King, J., 2011. [[How can you say such things?!?: Recognizing disagreement in informal political argument]]. ACL HLT 2011 , 2.
* Marcu, D., 2000. [[Perlocutions: The achilles’ heel of speech act theory]]. Journal of pragmatics 32, 1719-1741.
|relevance=Significant review of related work, embedded in the paper.
|journal=Decision Support Sciences
|doi=10.1016/j.dss.2012.05.032
|subject=Computer Science
}}

User:Jodi.a.schneider

2012-08-14T07:17:52Z

Jodi.a.schneider: /* Argumentation Mining */ * Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges

{{User
|name=Jodi Schneider
|photo=Jodi.jpg
|location=DERI, Galway, Ireland
|bio=I'm a Ph.D. student in social/semantic web at [http://deri.ie DERI]. Used to be the Community Liaison for AcaWiki
|blog=http://jodischneider.com/
|favorites=People Can Be So Fake: A New Dimension To Privacy And Technology Scholarship
|links=http://jodischneider.com/publications.html
}}
==In Progress==

* [[Persuasion in practical argument using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks]] (in progress)
* [[Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports]]

==Soon==
* [[Automatic argumentation detection and its role in law and the Semantic Web]]

==To review/improve==

* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
* [[Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination]]

==Summaries I mean to write:==
==Argumentation==

* [[A legal case OWL ontology with an instantiation of Popov v. Hayashi]]
* [[A speech act theory of metadiscourse]]
* [[An ontology in OWL for legal case-based reasoning]]

* K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. [[Justifying practical reasoning]]. In F. Grasso, C. Reed, and G. Carenini, editors, Proc. of the 4th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, pages 87-90, Valencia, Spain, 2004. http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~katie/cmna04.pdf
* Rudy Prabowo, Michael Thelwall, Iina Hellsten, and Andrea Scharnhorst. [[Evolving debate in online communication: A graph analytical approach]]. Internet Research, 18(5):520{540, 2008.
* Rudy Prabowo and Mike Thelwall. [[Finding and tracking subjects within an ongoing debate]]. Journal of Informetrics, 2(2):107-127, 2008.

* [[Three senses of argument]]
* [[From arguments in natural language to argumentation frameworks]]
* Peter McBurney, David Hitchcock, and Simon Parsons. [[The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue]]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95-132, 2007.
* Raquel Fern�andez and Ulle Endriss. [[Abstract models for dialogue protocols]]. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 16(2):121-140, 2007
* [[Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text]]

* [[From policy-making statements to first-order logic]]
* [[Argument mining from RADB and its usage in arguing agents and intelligent tutoring system]]
* [[A first step towards argument mining and its use in arguing agents and its]]
* [[Approaches to text mining arguments from legal cases]]
* [[On the exploration and exploitation of structural similarities in argumentative discourses]]
* [[Semantic models for policy deliberation]]
* [[Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases]]
* [[Multi-agent based classification using argumentation From experience]]
* [[Towards annotating and extracting textual legal case elements]]
* [[Argumentation semantics of communicative action]]
* Fréard, D., Denis, A., Détienne, F., Baker, M., Quignard, M., & Barcellini, F. (2010, August 25). [[The role of argumentation in online epistemic communities: The anatomy of a conflict in Wikipedia]]. Retrieved February 28, 2011, from http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00516994/en/
* d’Astous, P., De ́tienne, F., Robillard, P.N., Visser, W., 2001. [[Quantitative measurements of the influence of participants’ roles during peer review meetings]]. Empirical Software Engineering 6, 143–159.
* Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P., 2002. [[Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team communication]]. Design Studies 23 (5), 473–496.

==Persuasion==
* [[Persuasion detection in conversation]], Henry T. Gilbert, I. V., Master's thesis at Naval Postgraduate School, 2010.

==Wikipedia==
*[[Information quality work organization in Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia]]

*[[Wikipedian self-governance in action: Motivating the policy lens]]
*[[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]

===Deletion===
* S. K. Lam, J. Karim, and J. Riedl. [[The effects of group composition on decision quality in a social production community]]. In GROUP, pages 55–64, 2010. (decision quality for deletion)
* S. T. K. Lam and J. Riedl. [[Is Wikipedia growing a longer tail?]] In GROUP, pages 105–114, 2009. (overall reasons for deletion)
* D. Taraborelli and G. L. Ciampaglia. [[Beyond notability: Collective deliberation on content inclusion in Wikipedia]]. In Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops (SASOW), 2010.

===Talk pages===
* [[Talk before you type: Coordination in Wikipedia]]

==Other==

*[[The Semantic Web]]
*[[Which semantic web?]]
*[[The Social Semantic Web]]
*[[CiTO, the Citation Typing Ontology, and its use for annotation of reference lists and visualization of citation networks]]
*[[A network-based approach to text handling for the online scientific community]]
*[[Content-centered discussion mapping]]
*[[Study Supreme Court decision making with Linked Data]]
*Bates, Marcia J. "[[The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface.]]" Online Review 13 (October 1989): 407-424. http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/bates/berrypicking.html
*[[Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science]]
* Bates, Marcia J. "[[Search techniques]]." Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 16 (1981): 139-169.
* Paul Groth, Andrew Gibson, Jan Velterop (2010) [[The anatomy of a nanopublication]], 51-56. In Information Services & Use. http://www.mendeley.com/download/public/229912/3663016892/83f47cdc6d3cc086521abaac154a8f302a8c1587/dl.pdf
* Mons, Barend; van Haagen, Herman; Chichester, Christine; Hoen, Peter-Bram 't; den Dunnen, Johan T; van Ommen, Gertjan; van Mulligen, Erik; Singh, Bharat et al. (2011). "[[The value of data]]". Nature Genetics 43 (4): 281–283. doi:10.1038/ng0411-281. ISSN 1061-4036.

==Toolkit==
* List of [[Special:AllPages|all main namespace pages]]
* List of [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=4|all AcaWiki namespace pages]
* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula forumulas in wiki LaTeX]
* File bugs to [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wikimedia&component=AcaWiki Bugzilla]
* List of [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance%20desc&bug_status=__open__&product=Wikimedia&content=acawiki&list_id=3425 Open Bugs and Feature Requests].
* [[Template:Welcome]]
* [[Special:Version|What runs AcaWiki]]
* [[AcaWiki:Related people and groups]]
* [http://acawiki.org/Special:Ask?title=Special%3AAsk&q=[[DOI%3A%3A%2B]] semantic search example]
* [[Special:Userrights]]
* [[Special:SpecialPages]]
Deprecated:
* [[AcaWiki:Bugs]] and [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ issue tracker] (note: as of 2011-02-14, put please add nkinkade or nyergler as nosy on any ticket you create in the tracker)

My lists:
* [[User:Jodi.a.schneider/OfInterest|OfInterest]]

Lists I want:
* List of everything missing a URL -- with a way to indicate I've looked for a preprint/open access copy
* List of everything missing a DOI -- with a way to indicate I've searched for one
* List of images with unmarked copyright status (all of them at the moment)
* List of everything without at least one tag, maybe use [[Property:Tag]]

Other
* Ability to mark a journal openaccess, the entire run (could cause problems for time-dependent/articlebyarticle OA

Related projects and possible collaborators
* See http://mathoverflow.net/questions/13619/ (particularly [http://mathoverflow.net/users/1441/anton-petrunin Anton Petrunin])
** [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/ r-forum] (proposed project [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1&page=1#Item_0 description]
** [Ncat] - a math wiki for notes, may have some summaries, e.g. http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Categories+and+Sheaves and http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Topological+Quantum+Field+Theories+from+Compact+Lie+Groups
** [http://www.wikademic.org/ Wikademic] (some past discussion with Yossi Farjoun)
** [http://math-arch.org/] -- comments on math arXiv posts
* [http://researchblogging.org/ Research Blogging] is distributed and more opinionated, focusing on blog posts
* [http://www.bibdex.com/ bibdex] Allows private groups (Sunir Shah)

==Summaries Added==

==Argumentation==
* [[Argument Blogging]]
* [[Argument research corpus]]
* [[A computational model of argumentation in everyday conversation: A problem-centred approach]]
* [[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]]
* [[Expressing Argumentative Discussions in Social Media Sites]] - done
* [[Providing argument support for e-participation]]
* [[Spatial hypertext: An alternative to navigational and semantic links]]
* [[A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation]]
* [[Back to the future: Dimensions revisited]]
* [[Bottom-up argumentation]]
* [[Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis]]

==Systems & Projects==
* [[But, see, accord: Generating "Blue Book" citations in HYPO]]
*[[Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis]]
* [[Zest: Discussion mapping for mailing lists]]
* [[Value-based argumentation for democratic decision support]] (Parmenides)
===IMPACT project===
* [[Towards a structured online consultation tool]]
* [[A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making]]
* [[Towards Web-based mass argumentation in natural language]]

===IBIS===
*[[IBIS--a convincing concept...but a lousy instrument]]
* [[Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 Years on from gIBIS and QOC]]

===ScholOnto===
* [[Ontological foundations for scholarly debate mapping technology]]
* [[Modelling discourse in contested domains: A semiotic and cognitive framework]]
* [[Modeling naturalistic argumentation in research literatures: Representation and interaction design issues]]

===WWAW===
*[[Mass argumentation and the semantic web]]
*[[Towards an argument interchange format]]

===Argument Zoning===
(publication order)
* [[Task-based evaluation of summary quality: Describing relationships between scientific papers]]
* [[An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles]]
* [[Discourse-level argumentation in scientific articles: Human and automatic annotation.]]
* [[What's yours and what's mine: Determining intellectual attribution in scientific text]]
* [[Argumentative Zoning for improved citation indexing]]
* [[Towards discipline-independent argumentative zoning: Evidence from chemistry and computational linguistics]]

====Work primarily based on Argument Zoning====
=====Legal domain=====
* [[Summarising legal texts: Sentential tense and argumentative roles]]
* [[Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts]]
* [[Study on sentence relations in the automatic detection of argumentation in legal cases]] -- really uses argument zoning little to not at all

=====Scientific papers=====
* [[Ontology-based modelling of related work sections in research articles: Using CRFs for developing semantic data based information retrieval systems]]

===Barcellini's studies of the Python community===
*[[Participation in online interaction spaces: Design-use mediation in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[User and developer mediation in an Open Source Software community: Boundary spanning through cross participation in online discussions]]
*[[A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[A study of online discussion in an Open-Source community: reconstructing thematic coherence and argumentation from quotation practices]]
*[[Thematic coherence and quotation practices in OSS design-oriented online discussions]]

===Online argumentation===

==Frameworks and ontologies==
*[[An abstract framework for modeling argumentation in virtual communities]]
*[[Adding provenance and evolution information to modularized argumentation models]]
*[[Expressing argumentative discussions in social media sites]]

==Systems==
*[[Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 argumentation]] -- good discussion of what existing argumentation tools are lacking

*[[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]] -- dispute-resolution

==Linguistics==

===Argumentation Mining===
====Stance====
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]
* [[Introducing argumention in opinion analysis: Language and reasoning challenges]]

===Focus on Corpus Construction & Features Analysis for Machine Learning===
* [[How can you say such things?!?: Recognizing disagreement in informal political argument]] -- forum posts
* [[Cats rule and dogs drool!: Classifying stance in online debate]] -- debate systems (e.g. ConvinceMe)
** Journal version: [[That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate]]

====Persuasion====
* [[A microtext corpus for persuasion detection in dialog]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]

===Sentiment Analysis===
* [[Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews]]
* [[Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree]]

===Focus on Discourse Analysis===
*[[Leave a reply: An analysis of weblog comments]]

===Social Experiments===
*[[Social validation of collective annotations: Definition and experiment]] - annotation

==Discourse Structures==
* [[Analyzing Discourse Structure to Coordinate Educational Forums]]

===Rhetorical Relations===
* [[Discourse-marking of concession and contrast in asynchronous online discussion]]
* [[Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: An assessment]]

==Semantic Web==
*[[Implementing Semantic Web applications: reference architecture and challenges]]

==Social Semantic Web==
*[[Produce and Consume Linked Data with Drupal!]]
*[[What Would It Mean to Blog on the Semantic Web?]]

==HCI & CSCW==
*[[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers]]
*[[FeedWinnower: layering structures over collections of information streams]]
* [[What is social informatics and why does it matter?]]
* [[Participatory mashups: Using users to make data mashable]]
* [[Seven privacy worries in ubiquitous social computing]]

==Health==
*[[Self-Control Relies on Glucose as a Limited Energy Source: Willpower Is More Than a Metaphor]]
*[[Predicting adverse drug events using pharmacological network models]]

==Ireland==
* [[The extent of clientelism in Irish politics: Evidence from classifying Dáil questions on a local-national dimension]]

==Scientific Communication, Scholarly Publishing==
*[[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
*[[How to Review a Paper]]
* [[A wiki for Mizar: Motivation, considerations, and initial prototype]]
* [[New scenarios in scholarly publishing and debate]]
* [[Semantic Web and Social Web heading towards living documents in the life sciences]]

==Twitter==
* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms]]
* [[Unsupervised modeling of Twitter conversations]]
* [[Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining]]

===ICWSM 2010===
* [[Characterizing microblogs with topic models]]
* [[From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series]]
* [[Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks]]
* [[Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy]]
* [[Microblogging inside and outside the workplace]]
* [[Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment]]

==Wikipedia summaries==
* [[Beyond Wikipedia: Coordination and conflict in online production groups]]
* [[Readers are not free-riders: Reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia]]
* [[What Wikipedia deletes: Characterizing dangerous collaborative content]]
* [[Enhancing Wikipedia with semantic technologies]] (for Research Newsleter)
* [[Biographical social networks on Wikipedia - A cross-cultural study of links that made history]]

===Talk pages===
* [[Behind the article: Recognizing dialog acts in Wikipedia talk pages]]
* [[There is no deadline - Time evolution of Wikipedia discussions]]

===Wikimania 2010 summaries===
* [[Judicial citation to Wikipedia in published federal court opinions]]
* [[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]
* [[Wikipedia leeches? The promotion of traffic through a collaborative web format]]

==General information science==
*[[Idea tactics]]
*[[Information search tactics]]

<hr>
==Summaries I might write if somebody else doesn't do it first:==
* [[The rhetorical parsing, summarization, and generation of natural language texts]]
* [[Construction of disambiguated folksonomy ontologies using Wikipedia]]
* Antoine Isaac & Ed Summers (ed), [[SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System primer]], W3C Working Group Note (2009), especially the Appendix "Correspondences between ISO-2788/5964 and SKOS constructs"
* Alistair Miles & Brian Matthews, [[Review of RDF thesaurus work]] (SWAD-Europe Project deliverable)
* Brian Matthews, Alistair Miles & Michael Wilson, "[[Modelling thesauri for the Semantic Web]]", submission to workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (2003)
* Various articles on information quality from the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RENDER_Bibliography RENDER bibliography]
* Robert Sanderson, Benjamin Albritton, Rafael Schwemmer, and Herbert Van de Sompel. SharedCanvas: a collaborative model for medieval manuscript layout dissemination. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998111 JCDL 2011, uses Linked Data to help present manuscripts
* David Bamman and Gregory Crane. 2011. Measuring historical word sense variation. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998078 JCDL 2011, uses corpus statistics to automatically identify word sense variation in Latin:

==Articles I'd like somebody else to summarize:==
* [[The role of mentorship in protege performance]]
* [[Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions]]
* The five most influential papers in usability (see [http://www.measuringusability.com/blog/five-papers.php list]:
:** [[Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think]]
:** [[Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces]]
:** [[Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods]]
:** [[Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough?]]
:** [[Do usability evaluators agree on what usability problems are?]]
:Also their runners-up:
:** [[Tutorials for the first-time computer user]]
:** [[Human factors and usability]]
:** [[Testing small system customer setup]]
:** [[A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems]]
:** [[The evaluator effect in usability tests]]
* stuff from Jeff Jarvis' [http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/07/07/publicness-bibliography/ Publicness bibliography]
* [[Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology‎]]
* [[The collapse of complex societies]] (see [http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/04/the-collapse-of-complex-business-models/ Shirky's summary])
* [[Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis]]

* via http://himsit.com/musings/facebook/
** James Coleman’s [[Social capital in the creation of human capital]]
** Robert Putnam’s [[Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital]]
** [[Impact of state-level social capital on the emergence of virtual communities]]
** [[The productivity paradox of information technology]] [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632 DOI full-text]

* Psychology
** [[False-Positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant]]

Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree

2012-07-11T14:23:01Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree
|authors=Wei Wei and Jon Atle Gulla
|url=http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id1858681.1858723
|tags=ontologies, product reviews, sentiment analysis,
|summary=This paper points out that product reviews contain domain-specific knowledge. To capture the hierarchical relationships between product attributes, they introduce a new approach: "hierarchical learning with sentiment ontology tree" (HL-SOT) in order to:
# identify attributes
# identify which attributes have sentiment attached to them
This would enable searching for particular attributes in reviews.

Here is a sample sentiment ontology tree:
[[File:Sentiment-ontology-tree.png]]

Their algorithm is based on H-RLS from [[Incremental algorithms for hierarchical classification]]. Evaluations are conducted against a human-labeled data set.

==Selected references==
* Nicolo` Cesa-Bianchi, Claudio Gentile, and Luca Zani-boni. 2006. [[Incremental algorithms for hierarchical classification]]. Journal of Machine Learning Re-search (JMLR), 7:31-54.
|journal=Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics
|pub_date=2010
|subject=Computer Science
}}

File:Sentiment-ontology-tree.png

2012-07-11T14:14:42Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Sentiment ontology tree, Figure 1 from Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree

Sentiment ontology tree, Figure 1 from [[Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree]]

User:Jodi.a.schneider

2012-07-11T14:10:38Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{User
|name=Jodi Schneider
|photo=Jodi.jpg
|location=DERI, Galway, Ireland
|bio=I'm a Ph.D. student in social/semantic web at [http://deri.ie DERI]. Used to be the Community Liaison for AcaWiki
|blog=http://jodischneider.com/
|favorites=People Can Be So Fake: A New Dimension To Privacy And Technology Scholarship
|links=http://jodischneider.com/publications.html
}}
==In Progress==

* [[Persuasion in practical argument using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks]] (in progress)
* [[Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports]]

==Soon==
* [[Automatic argumentation detection and its role in law and the Semantic Web]]

==To review/improve==

* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
* [[Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination]]

==Summaries I mean to write:==
==Argumentation==

* [[A legal case OWL ontology with an instantiation of Popov v. Hayashi]]
* [[A speech act theory of metadiscourse]]
* [[An ontology in OWL for legal case-based reasoning]]

* K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. [[Justifying practical reasoning]]. In F. Grasso, C. Reed, and G. Carenini, editors, Proc. of the 4th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, pages 87-90, Valencia, Spain, 2004. http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~katie/cmna04.pdf
* Rudy Prabowo, Michael Thelwall, Iina Hellsten, and Andrea Scharnhorst. [[Evolving debate in online communication: A graph analytical approach]]. Internet Research, 18(5):520{540, 2008.
* Rudy Prabowo and Mike Thelwall. [[Finding and tracking subjects within an ongoing debate]]. Journal of Informetrics, 2(2):107-127, 2008.

* [[Three senses of argument]]
* [[From arguments in natural language to argumentation frameworks]]
* Peter McBurney, David Hitchcock, and Simon Parsons. [[The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue]]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95-132, 2007.
* Raquel Fern�andez and Ulle Endriss. [[Abstract models for dialogue protocols]]. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 16(2):121-140, 2007
* [[Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text]]

* [[From policy-making statements to first-order logic]]
* [[Argument mining from RADB and its usage in arguing agents and intelligent tutoring system]]
* [[A first step towards argument mining and its use in arguing agents and its]]
* [[Approaches to text mining arguments from legal cases]]
* [[On the exploration and exploitation of structural similarities in argumentative discourses]]
* [[Semantic models for policy deliberation]]
* [[Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases]]
* [[Multi-agent based classification using argumentation From experience]]
* [[Towards annotating and extracting textual legal case elements]]
* [[Argumentation semantics of communicative action]]
* Fréard, D., Denis, A., Détienne, F., Baker, M., Quignard, M., & Barcellini, F. (2010, August 25). [[The role of argumentation in online epistemic communities: The anatomy of a conflict in Wikipedia]]. Retrieved February 28, 2011, from http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00516994/en/
* d’Astous, P., De ́tienne, F., Robillard, P.N., Visser, W., 2001. [[Quantitative measurements of the influence of participants’ roles during peer review meetings]]. Empirical Software Engineering 6, 143–159.
* Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P., 2002. [[Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team communication]]. Design Studies 23 (5), 473–496.

==Persuasion==
* [[Persuasion detection in conversation]], Henry T. Gilbert, I. V., Master's thesis at Naval Postgraduate School, 2010.

==Wikipedia==
*[[Information quality work organization in Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia]]

*[[Wikipedian self-governance in action: Motivating the policy lens]]
*[[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]

===Deletion===
* S. K. Lam, J. Karim, and J. Riedl. [[The effects of group composition on decision quality in a social production community]]. In GROUP, pages 55–64, 2010. (decision quality for deletion)
* S. T. K. Lam and J. Riedl. [[Is Wikipedia growing a longer tail?]] In GROUP, pages 105–114, 2009. (overall reasons for deletion)
* D. Taraborelli and G. L. Ciampaglia. [[Beyond notability: Collective deliberation on content inclusion in Wikipedia]]. In Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops (SASOW), 2010.

===Talk pages===
* [[Talk before you type: Coordination in Wikipedia]]

==Other==

*[[The Semantic Web]]
*[[Which semantic web?]]
*[[The Social Semantic Web]]
*[[CiTO, the Citation Typing Ontology, and its use for annotation of reference lists and visualization of citation networks]]
*[[A network-based approach to text handling for the online scientific community]]
*[[Content-centered discussion mapping]]
*[[Study Supreme Court decision making with Linked Data]]
*Bates, Marcia J. "[[The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface.]]" Online Review 13 (October 1989): 407-424. http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/bates/berrypicking.html
*[[Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science]]
* Bates, Marcia J. "[[Search techniques]]." Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 16 (1981): 139-169.
* Paul Groth, Andrew Gibson, Jan Velterop (2010) [[The anatomy of a nanopublication]], 51-56. In Information Services & Use. http://www.mendeley.com/download/public/229912/3663016892/83f47cdc6d3cc086521abaac154a8f302a8c1587/dl.pdf
* Mons, Barend; van Haagen, Herman; Chichester, Christine; Hoen, Peter-Bram 't; den Dunnen, Johan T; van Ommen, Gertjan; van Mulligen, Erik; Singh, Bharat et al. (2011). "[[The value of data]]". Nature Genetics 43 (4): 281–283. doi:10.1038/ng0411-281. ISSN 1061-4036.

==Toolkit==
* List of [[Special:AllPages|all main namespace pages]]
* List of [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=4|all AcaWiki namespace pages]
* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula forumulas in wiki LaTeX]
* File bugs to [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wikimedia&component=AcaWiki Bugzilla]
* List of [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance%20desc&bug_status=__open__&product=Wikimedia&content=acawiki&list_id=3425 Open Bugs and Feature Requests].
* [[Template:Welcome]]
* [[Special:Version|What runs AcaWiki]]
* [[AcaWiki:Related people and groups]]
* [http://acawiki.org/Special:Ask?title=Special%3AAsk&q=[[DOI%3A%3A%2B]] semantic search example]
* [[Special:Userrights]]
* [[Special:SpecialPages]]
Deprecated:
* [[AcaWiki:Bugs]] and [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ issue tracker] (note: as of 2011-02-14, put please add nkinkade or nyergler as nosy on any ticket you create in the tracker)

My lists:
* [[User:Jodi.a.schneider/OfInterest|OfInterest]]

Lists I want:
* List of everything missing a URL -- with a way to indicate I've looked for a preprint/open access copy
* List of everything missing a DOI -- with a way to indicate I've searched for one
* List of images with unmarked copyright status (all of them at the moment)
* List of everything without at least one tag, maybe use [[Property:Tag]]

Other
* Ability to mark a journal openaccess, the entire run (could cause problems for time-dependent/articlebyarticle OA

Related projects and possible collaborators
* See http://mathoverflow.net/questions/13619/ (particularly [http://mathoverflow.net/users/1441/anton-petrunin Anton Petrunin])
** [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/ r-forum] (proposed project [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1&page=1#Item_0 description]
** [Ncat] - a math wiki for notes, may have some summaries, e.g. http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Categories+and+Sheaves and http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Topological+Quantum+Field+Theories+from+Compact+Lie+Groups
** [http://www.wikademic.org/ Wikademic] (some past discussion with Yossi Farjoun)
** [http://math-arch.org/] -- comments on math arXiv posts
* [http://researchblogging.org/ Research Blogging] is distributed and more opinionated, focusing on blog posts
* [http://www.bibdex.com/ bibdex] Allows private groups (Sunir Shah)

==Summaries Added==

==Argumentation==
* [[Argument Blogging]]
* [[Argument research corpus]]
* [[A computational model of argumentation in everyday conversation: A problem-centred approach]]
* [[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]]
* [[Expressing Argumentative Discussions in Social Media Sites]] - done
* [[Providing argument support for e-participation]]
* [[Spatial hypertext: An alternative to navigational and semantic links]]
* [[A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation]]
* [[Back to the future: Dimensions revisited]]
* [[Bottom-up argumentation]]
* [[Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis]]

==Systems & Projects==
* [[But, see, accord: Generating "Blue Book" citations in HYPO]]
*[[Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis]]
* [[Zest: Discussion mapping for mailing lists]]
* [[Value-based argumentation for democratic decision support]] (Parmenides)
===IMPACT project===
* [[Towards a structured online consultation tool]]
* [[A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making]]
* [[Towards Web-based mass argumentation in natural language]]

===IBIS===
*[[IBIS--a convincing concept...but a lousy instrument]]
* [[Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 Years on from gIBIS and QOC]]

===ScholOnto===
* [[Ontological foundations for scholarly debate mapping technology]]
* [[Modelling discourse in contested domains: A semiotic and cognitive framework]]
* [[Modeling naturalistic argumentation in research literatures: Representation and interaction design issues]]

===WWAW===
*[[Mass argumentation and the semantic web]]
*[[Towards an argument interchange format]]

===Argument Zoning===
(publication order)
* [[Task-based evaluation of summary quality: Describing relationships between scientific papers]]
* [[An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles]]
* [[Discourse-level argumentation in scientific articles: Human and automatic annotation.]]
* [[What's yours and what's mine: Determining intellectual attribution in scientific text]]
* [[Argumentative Zoning for improved citation indexing]]
* [[Towards discipline-independent argumentative zoning: Evidence from chemistry and computational linguistics]]

====Work primarily based on Argument Zoning====
=====Legal domain=====
* [[Summarising legal texts: Sentential tense and argumentative roles]]
* [[Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts]]
* [[Study on sentence relations in the automatic detection of argumentation in legal cases]] -- really uses argument zoning little to not at all

=====Scientific papers=====
* [[Ontology-based modelling of related work sections in research articles: Using CRFs for developing semantic data based information retrieval systems]]

===Barcellini's studies of the Python community===
*[[Participation in online interaction spaces: Design-use mediation in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[User and developer mediation in an Open Source Software community: Boundary spanning through cross participation in online discussions]]
*[[A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[A study of online discussion in an Open-Source community: reconstructing thematic coherence and argumentation from quotation practices]]
*[[Thematic coherence and quotation practices in OSS design-oriented online discussions]]

===Online argumentation===

==Frameworks and ontologies==
*[[An abstract framework for modeling argumentation in virtual communities]]
*[[Adding provenance and evolution information to modularized argumentation models]]
*[[Expressing argumentative discussions in social media sites]]

==Systems==
*[[Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 argumentation]] -- good discussion of what existing argumentation tools are lacking

*[[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]] -- dispute-resolution

==Linguistics==

===Argumentation Mining===
====Stance====
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]

===Focus on Corpus Construction & Features Analysis for Machine Learning===
* [[How can you say such things?!?: Recognizing disagreement in informal political argument]] -- forum posts
* [[Cats rule and dogs drool!: Classifying stance in online debate]] -- debate systems (e.g. ConvinceMe)
** Journal version: [[That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate]]

====Persuasion====
* [[A microtext corpus for persuasion detection in dialog]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]

===Sentiment Analysis===
* [[Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews]]
* [[Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree]]

===Focus on Discourse Analysis===
*[[Leave a reply: An analysis of weblog comments]]

===Social Experiments===
*[[Social validation of collective annotations: Definition and experiment]] - annotation

==Discourse Structures==
* [[Analyzing Discourse Structure to Coordinate Educational Forums]]

===Rhetorical Relations===
* [[Discourse-marking of concession and contrast in asynchronous online discussion]]
* [[Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: An assessment]]

==Semantic Web==
*[[Implementing Semantic Web applications: reference architecture and challenges]]

==Social Semantic Web==
*[[Produce and Consume Linked Data with Drupal!]]
*[[What Would It Mean to Blog on the Semantic Web?]]

==HCI & CSCW==
*[[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers]]
*[[FeedWinnower: layering structures over collections of information streams]]
* [[What is social informatics and why does it matter?]]
* [[Participatory mashups: Using users to make data mashable]]
* [[Seven privacy worries in ubiquitous social computing]]

==Health==
*[[Self-Control Relies on Glucose as a Limited Energy Source: Willpower Is More Than a Metaphor]]
*[[Predicting adverse drug events using pharmacological network models]]

==Ireland==
* [[The extent of clientelism in Irish politics: Evidence from classifying Dáil questions on a local-national dimension]]

==Scientific Communication, Scholarly Publishing==
*[[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
*[[How to Review a Paper]]
* [[A wiki for Mizar: Motivation, considerations, and initial prototype]]
* [[New scenarios in scholarly publishing and debate]]
* [[Semantic Web and Social Web heading towards living documents in the life sciences]]

==Twitter==
* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms]]
* [[Unsupervised modeling of Twitter conversations]]
* [[Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining]]

===ICWSM 2010===
* [[Characterizing microblogs with topic models]]
* [[From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series]]
* [[Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks]]
* [[Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy]]
* [[Microblogging inside and outside the workplace]]
* [[Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment]]

==Wikipedia summaries==
* [[Beyond Wikipedia: Coordination and conflict in online production groups]]
* [[Readers are not free-riders: Reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia]]
* [[What Wikipedia deletes: Characterizing dangerous collaborative content]]
* [[Enhancing Wikipedia with semantic technologies]] (for Research Newsleter)
* [[Biographical social networks on Wikipedia - A cross-cultural study of links that made history]]

===Talk pages===
* [[Behind the article: Recognizing dialog acts in Wikipedia talk pages]]
* [[There is no deadline - Time evolution of Wikipedia discussions]]

===Wikimania 2010 summaries===
* [[Judicial citation to Wikipedia in published federal court opinions]]
* [[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]
* [[Wikipedia leeches? The promotion of traffic through a collaborative web format]]

==General information science==
*[[Idea tactics]]
*[[Information search tactics]]

<hr>
==Summaries I might write if somebody else doesn't do it first:==
* [[The rhetorical parsing, summarization, and generation of natural language texts]]
* [[Construction of disambiguated folksonomy ontologies using Wikipedia]]
* Antoine Isaac & Ed Summers (ed), [[SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System primer]], W3C Working Group Note (2009), especially the Appendix "Correspondences between ISO-2788/5964 and SKOS constructs"
* Alistair Miles & Brian Matthews, [[Review of RDF thesaurus work]] (SWAD-Europe Project deliverable)
* Brian Matthews, Alistair Miles & Michael Wilson, "[[Modelling thesauri for the Semantic Web]]", submission to workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (2003)
* Various articles on information quality from the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RENDER_Bibliography RENDER bibliography]
* Robert Sanderson, Benjamin Albritton, Rafael Schwemmer, and Herbert Van de Sompel. SharedCanvas: a collaborative model for medieval manuscript layout dissemination. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998111 JCDL 2011, uses Linked Data to help present manuscripts
* David Bamman and Gregory Crane. 2011. Measuring historical word sense variation. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998078 JCDL 2011, uses corpus statistics to automatically identify word sense variation in Latin:

==Articles I'd like somebody else to summarize:==
* [[The role of mentorship in protege performance]]
* [[Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions]]
* The five most influential papers in usability (see [http://www.measuringusability.com/blog/five-papers.php list]:
:** [[Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think]]
:** [[Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces]]
:** [[Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods]]
:** [[Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough?]]
:** [[Do usability evaluators agree on what usability problems are?]]
:Also their runners-up:
:** [[Tutorials for the first-time computer user]]
:** [[Human factors and usability]]
:** [[Testing small system customer setup]]
:** [[A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems]]
:** [[The evaluator effect in usability tests]]
* stuff from Jeff Jarvis' [http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/07/07/publicness-bibliography/ Publicness bibliography]
* [[Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology‎]]
* [[The collapse of complex societies]] (see [http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/04/the-collapse-of-complex-business-models/ Shirky's summary])
* [[Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis]]

* via http://himsit.com/musings/facebook/
** James Coleman’s [[Social capital in the creation of human capital]]
** Robert Putnam’s [[Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital]]
** [[Impact of state-level social capital on the emergence of virtual communities]]
** [[The productivity paradox of information technology]] [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632 DOI full-text]

* Psychology
** [[False-Positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant]]

Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree

2012-07-11T14:09:11Z

Jodi.a.schneider: BibTeX auto import 2012-07-11 04:09:11

{{Summary
|title=Sentiment learning on product reviews via sentiment ontology tree
|authors=Wei Wei and Jon Atle Gulla
|pub_date=2010
|url=http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id1858681.1858723
}}

Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews

2012-07-11T10:16:09Z

Jodi.a.schneider: remove | which was causing a display problem

{{Summary
|title=Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews
|authors=Dave Kushal and Steve Lawrence and David M. Pennock
|url=http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/775152.775226
|tags=opinion mining, sentiment analysis, product reviews, machine learning, information extraction
|summary=This 2003 paper provides a useful guide to related work in several areas:
* objectivity/subjectivity classification
* word classification (e.g. 'textual conjunctions like "fair and legitimate" or "simplistic but well-received" to separate similarly- and oppositely-connoted words.' [[Predicting the semantic orientation of adjectives]]).
* sentiment classification
* recommendations
* commercial products

They compare information retrieval approaches with machine learning.

==Review Processing==

===Sources===
They process reviews from two consumer websites, Cnet and Amazon. They use two tests: unprocessed reviews and balanced (e.g. equal numbers of positive and negative reviews) numbers of randomly selected reviews.

===Substitutions===
They try several kinds of substitutions:
* number and category (e.g. replacing the product names with a generic variable)
* linguistic substitutions using Wordnet colocations
* Porter's stemming
* negatives
* N-grams and proximity
* substrings
Overgeneralization seems to cause many problems with the substitutions chosen.

===Outcomes===
Then they count:
* how many times each term occurs
* how many documents each term occurs in
* how many categories a term occurs in
* how many categories a term occurs in

They smooth, score the reviews (trying various machine learning algorithms), reweight. Now they can classify new documents based on the feature vectors of these documents. They detail further experiments, such as scaling the feature records.

They present a system called ReviewSeer that collects product mentions from search engines.
mining particular products and groups these into categories and give assessments.

As an initial corpus, they select and manually tag 600 sentences (200 for each of 3 products). Many sentences are ambiguous out of context, do not express an opinion, or do not describe the product. They conclude that it is important to first find "coherent, topical opinions".

They also present conclusions and ideas for future work.

==Selected References==
* Vasileios Hatzivassiloglou and Kathleen R. McKeown. [[Predicting the semantic orientation of adjectives]]. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of ACL, 1997.
|journal=Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web
|pub_date=2003
|doi=10.1145/775152.775226
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews

2012-07-09T16:02:58Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews
|authors=Dave Kushal and Steve Lawrence and David M. Pennock
|url=http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/775152.775226
|tags=opinion mining, sentiment analysis, product reviews, machine learning, information extraction
|summary=This 2003 paper provides a useful guide to related work in several areas:
* objectivity/subjectivity classification
* word classification (e.g. 'textual conjunctions like "fair and legitimate" or "simplistic but well-received" to separate similarly- and oppositely-connoted words.' [[Predicting the semantic orientation of adjectives]]).
* sentiment classification
* recommendations
* commercial products

They compare information retrieval approaches with machine learning.

==Review Processing==

===Sources===
They process reviews from two consumer websites, C|net and Amazon. They use two tests: unprocessed reviews and balanced (e.g. equal numbers of positive and negative reviews) numbers of randomly selected reviews.

===Substitutions===
They try several kinds of substitutions:
* number and category (e.g. replacing the product names with a generic variable)
* linguistic substitutions using Wordnet colocations
* Porter's stemming
* negatives
* N-grams and proximity
* substrings
Overgeneralization seems to cause many problems with the substitutions chosen.

===Outcomes===
Then they count:
* how many times each term occurs
* how many documents each term occurs in
* how many categories a term occurs in
* how many categories a term occurs in

They smooth, score the reviews (trying various machine learning algorithms), reweight. Now they can classify new documents based on the feature vectors of these documents. They detail further experiments, such as scaling the feature records.

They present a system called ReviewSeer that collects product mentions from search engines.
mining particular products and groups these into categories and give assessments.

As an initial corpus, they select and manually tag 600 sentences (200 for each of 3 products). Many sentences are ambiguous out of context, do not express an opinion, or do not describe the product. They conclude that it is important to first find "coherent, topical opinions".

They also present conclusions and ideas for future work.

==Selected References==
* Vasileios Hatzivassiloglou and Kathleen R. McKeown. [[Predicting the semantic orientation of adjectives]]. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of ACL, 1997.
|journal=Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web
|pub_date=2003
|doi=10.1145/775152.775226
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews

2012-07-09T16:00:56Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Mining the peanut gallery: Opinion extraction and semantic classification of product reviews
|authors=Dave Kushal and Steve Lawrence and David M. Pennock
|url=http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/775152.775226
|tags=opinion mining, sentiment analysis, product reviews, machine learning
|summary=This 2003 paper provides a useful guide to related work in several areas:
* objectivity/subjectivity classification
* word classification (e.g. 'textual conjunctions like "fair and legitimate" or "simplistic but well-received" to separate similarly- and oppositely-connoted words.' [[Predicting the semantic orientation of adjectives]]).
* sentiment classification
* recommendations
* commercial products

They compare information retrieval approaches with machine learning.

==Review Processing==

===Sources===
They process reviews from two consumer websites, C|net and Amazon. They use two tests: unprocessed reviews and balanced (e.g. equal numbers of positive and negative reviews) numbers of randomly selected reviews.

===Substitutions===
They try several kinds of substitutions:
* number and category (e.g. replacing the product names with a generic variable)
* linguistic substitutions using Wordnet colocations
* Porter's stemming
* negatives
* N-grams and proximity
* substrings
Overgeneralization seems to cause many problems with the substitutions chosen.

===Outcomes===
Then they count:
* how many times each term occurs
* how many documents each term occurs in
* how many categories a term occurs in
* how many categories a term occurs in

They smooth, score the reviews (trying various machine learning algorithms), reweight. Now they can classify new documents based on the feature vectors of these documents. They detail further experiments, such as scaling the feature records.

They present a system called ReviewSeer that collects product mentions from search engines.
mining particular products and groups these into categories and give assessments.

As an initial corpus, they select and manually tag 600 sentences (200 for each of 3 products). Many sentences are ambiguous out of context, do not express an opinion, or do not describe the product. They conclude that it is important to first find "coherent, topical opinions".

They also present conclusions and ideas for future work.

==Selected References==
* Vasileios Hatzivassiloglou and Kathleen R. McKeown. [[Predicting the semantic orientation of adjectives]]. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of ACL, 1997.
|journal=Proceedings of the 12th international conference on World Wide Web
|pub_date=2003
|doi=10.1145/775152.775226
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Some Facets of Argument Mining for Opinion Analysis

2012-07-06T14:47:35Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis
|authors=Maria Garcia-Villalba and Patrick Saint-Dizier
|url=http://www.irit.fr/~Patrick.Saint-Dizier/publi_fichier/COMMA-submission10.pdf
|tags=opinion mining, online argumentation, argumentation mining
|summary=Villalba & Saint-Dizier discuss the problem of argument extraction in opinion texts, in order to understand and present deeper analysis of why consumers like or dislike a product. Their goal is to induce a system of preferences from attribute-value pairs and a recommendation, identifying these from a review which contains opinion (aka "evaluative") expressions.

They make two main claims:
# "evaluative expressions with a 'heavy' semantic load" can be interpreted as arguments and
# "that the association of an evaluative expression with a discourse structure such as an elaboration, an illustration, or a reformulation must also be interpreted as an argument".

In addressing claim (1):
They indicate that some, but not all, evaluative expressions function as arguments; they do not operationalize this, but merely provide descriptive examples. For instance:
"an expression in the hotel domain such as: clean rooms has no real argumentative power because 'clean' is a standard value for rooms"
In comparison, they say that "accueil familial (English gloss: you are welcomed as a family member)" incorporates an argument, since 'familial' has a rich semantic structure, with the probable interpretation: 'because the owners behave as if you were part of their family'. They describe this by saying that "'familial' is a higher-order adjective" -- yet this does not indicate how to determine or test which adjectives are "higher-order".
They see the list of adjectives and modifiers and the semantic features underlying the adjectives (which they envision as extracted and combined) as an "informal set of arguments".

In addressing claim (2):
They see the discourse structures accompanying evaluative expressions as "forms of explanation that realize argument schemas". But they do not construct the schemas.

They argue that, when combined with an evaluative expression, "elaborations, illustrations and other rhetorical relations related to explanation" acquire "argumentative power or orientation" by behaving "as argument supports and make explicit the semantic and pragmatic function of the support: e.g. they justify, illustrate, develop the evaluative expression".

They then detail, for various discourse relations, how they relate to the evaluations:

* Justification clarifies the reasons for an evaluation

Some types of elaboration support the evaluation:
* illustration
* enumeration ("adds strength")
* precision ("adds specific information")
* comparison ("reinforce a statement, making a parallel with a better or worse situation or object, more or less explicit")

Other types of elaboration stress the importance of the attribute:
* via consequence ("develops the advantages of a positive or a negative evaluation")

* Contrast and Concession generally weaken the evaluation

Some discourse relations do not really have argumentative force, such as reformulation.
|journal=Proceeding of the 2012 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2012
|pub_date=2012
|subject=Computer Science
}}

User:Jodi.a.schneider

2012-07-06T14:46:34Z

Jodi.a.schneider: /* Argumentation */ * Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis

{{User
|name=Jodi Schneider
|photo=Jodi.jpg
|location=DERI, Galway, Ireland
|bio=I'm a Ph.D. student in social/semantic web at [http://deri.ie DERI]. Used to be the Community Liaison for AcaWiki
|blog=http://jodischneider.com/
|favorites=People Can Be So Fake: A New Dimension To Privacy And Technology Scholarship
|links=http://jodischneider.com/publications.html
}}
==In Progress==

* [[Persuasion in practical argument using Value-based Argumentation Frameworks]] (in progress)
* [[Design, discussion, and dissent in open bug reports]]

==Soon==
* [[Automatic argumentation detection and its role in law and the Semantic Web]]

==To review/improve==

* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
* [[Finding Deceptive Opinion Spam by Any Stretch of the Imagination]]

==Summaries I mean to write:==
==Argumentation==

* [[A legal case OWL ontology with an instantiation of Popov v. Hayashi]]
* [[A speech act theory of metadiscourse]]
* [[An ontology in OWL for legal case-based reasoning]]

* K. Atkinson, T. Bench-Capon, and P. McBurney. [[Justifying practical reasoning]]. In F. Grasso, C. Reed, and G. Carenini, editors, Proc. of the 4th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, pages 87-90, Valencia, Spain, 2004. http://www.csc.liv.ac.uk/~katie/cmna04.pdf
* Rudy Prabowo, Michael Thelwall, Iina Hellsten, and Andrea Scharnhorst. [[Evolving debate in online communication: A graph analytical approach]]. Internet Research, 18(5):520{540, 2008.
* Rudy Prabowo and Mike Thelwall. [[Finding and tracking subjects within an ongoing debate]]. Journal of Informetrics, 2(2):107-127, 2008.

* [[Three senses of argument]]
* [[From arguments in natural language to argumentation frameworks]]
* Peter McBurney, David Hitchcock, and Simon Parsons. [[The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue]]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95-132, 2007.
* Raquel Fern�andez and Ulle Endriss. [[Abstract models for dialogue protocols]]. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 16(2):121-140, 2007
* [[Argumentation mining: The detection, classification and structure of arguments in text]]

* [[From policy-making statements to first-order logic]]
* [[Argument mining from RADB and its usage in arguing agents and intelligent tutoring system]]
* [[A first step towards argument mining and its use in arguing agents and its]]
* [[Approaches to text mining arguments from legal cases]]
* [[On the exploration and exploitation of structural similarities in argumentative discourses]]
* [[Semantic models for policy deliberation]]
* [[Towards formalising argumentation about legal cases]]
* [[Multi-agent based classification using argumentation From experience]]
* [[Towards annotating and extracting textual legal case elements]]
* [[Argumentation semantics of communicative action]]
* Fréard, D., Denis, A., Détienne, F., Baker, M., Quignard, M., & Barcellini, F. (2010, August 25). [[The role of argumentation in online epistemic communities: The anatomy of a conflict in Wikipedia]]. Retrieved February 28, 2011, from http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00516994/en/
* d’Astous, P., De ́tienne, F., Robillard, P.N., Visser, W., 2001. [[Quantitative measurements of the influence of participants’ roles during peer review meetings]]. Empirical Software Engineering 6, 143–159.
* Stempfle, J., Badke-Schaub, P., 2002. [[Thinking in design teams – an analysis of team communication]]. Design Studies 23 (5), 473–496.

==Persuasion==
* [[Persuasion detection in conversation]], Henry T. Gilbert, I. V., Master's thesis at Naval Postgraduate School, 2010.

==Wikipedia==
*[[Information quality work organization in Wikipedia]]
*[[Wikipedians are born, not made: a study of power editors on Wikipedia]]

*[[Wikipedian self-governance in action: Motivating the policy lens]]
*[[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]

===Deletion===
* S. K. Lam, J. Karim, and J. Riedl. [[The effects of group composition on decision quality in a social production community]]. In GROUP, pages 55–64, 2010. (decision quality for deletion)
* S. T. K. Lam and J. Riedl. [[Is Wikipedia growing a longer tail?]] In GROUP, pages 105–114, 2009. (overall reasons for deletion)
* D. Taraborelli and G. L. Ciampaglia. [[Beyond notability: Collective deliberation on content inclusion in Wikipedia]]. In Self-Adaptive and Self-Organizing Systems Workshops (SASOW), 2010.

===Talk pages===
* [[Talk before you type: Coordination in Wikipedia]]

==Other==

*[[The Semantic Web]]
*[[Which semantic web?]]
*[[The Social Semantic Web]]
*[[CiTO, the Citation Typing Ontology, and its use for annotation of reference lists and visualization of citation networks]]
*[[A network-based approach to text handling for the online scientific community]]
*[[Content-centered discussion mapping]]
*[[Study Supreme Court decision making with Linked Data]]
*Bates, Marcia J. "[[The design of browsing and berrypicking techniques for the online search interface.]]" Online Review 13 (October 1989): 407-424. http://gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/bates/berrypicking.html
*[[Information and knowledge: An evolutionary framework for information science]]
* Bates, Marcia J. "[[Search techniques]]." Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 16 (1981): 139-169.
* Paul Groth, Andrew Gibson, Jan Velterop (2010) [[The anatomy of a nanopublication]], 51-56. In Information Services & Use. http://www.mendeley.com/download/public/229912/3663016892/83f47cdc6d3cc086521abaac154a8f302a8c1587/dl.pdf
* Mons, Barend; van Haagen, Herman; Chichester, Christine; Hoen, Peter-Bram 't; den Dunnen, Johan T; van Ommen, Gertjan; van Mulligen, Erik; Singh, Bharat et al. (2011). "[[The value of data]]". Nature Genetics 43 (4): 281–283. doi:10.1038/ng0411-281. ISSN 1061-4036.

==Toolkit==
* List of [[Special:AllPages|all main namespace pages]]
* List of [http://acawiki.org/index.php?title=Special%3AAllPages&from=&to=&namespace=4|all AcaWiki namespace pages]
* [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Formula forumulas in wiki LaTeX]
* File bugs to [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Wikimedia&component=AcaWiki Bugzilla]
* List of [https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&order=relevance%20desc&bug_status=__open__&product=Wikimedia&content=acawiki&list_id=3425 Open Bugs and Feature Requests].
* [[Template:Welcome]]
* [[Special:Version|What runs AcaWiki]]
* [[AcaWiki:Related people and groups]]
* [http://acawiki.org/Special:Ask?title=Special%3AAsk&q=[[DOI%3A%3A%2B]] semantic search example]
* [[Special:Userrights]]
* [[Special:SpecialPages]]
Deprecated:
* [[AcaWiki:Bugs]] and [http://code.creativecommons.org/issues/ issue tracker] (note: as of 2011-02-14, put please add nkinkade or nyergler as nosy on any ticket you create in the tracker)

My lists:
* [[User:Jodi.a.schneider/OfInterest|OfInterest]]

Lists I want:
* List of everything missing a URL -- with a way to indicate I've looked for a preprint/open access copy
* List of everything missing a DOI -- with a way to indicate I've searched for one
* List of images with unmarked copyright status (all of them at the moment)
* List of everything without at least one tag, maybe use [[Property:Tag]]

Other
* Ability to mark a journal openaccess, the entire run (could cause problems for time-dependent/articlebyarticle OA

Related projects and possible collaborators
* See http://mathoverflow.net/questions/13619/ (particularly [http://mathoverflow.net/users/1441/anton-petrunin Anton Petrunin])
** [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/ r-forum] (proposed project [http://www.math.ntnu.no/~stacey/Vanilla/rForum/comments.php?DiscussionID=1&page=1#Item_0 description]
** [Ncat] - a math wiki for notes, may have some summaries, e.g. http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Categories+and+Sheaves and http://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Topological+Quantum+Field+Theories+from+Compact+Lie+Groups
** [http://www.wikademic.org/ Wikademic] (some past discussion with Yossi Farjoun)
** [http://math-arch.org/] -- comments on math arXiv posts
* [http://researchblogging.org/ Research Blogging] is distributed and more opinionated, focusing on blog posts
* [http://www.bibdex.com/ bibdex] Allows private groups (Sunir Shah)

==Summaries Added==

==Argumentation==
* [[Argument Blogging]]
* [[Argument research corpus]]
* [[A computational model of argumentation in everyday conversation: A problem-centred approach]]
* [[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]]
* [[Expressing Argumentative Discussions in Social Media Sites]] - done
* [[Providing argument support for e-participation]]
* [[Spatial hypertext: An alternative to navigational and semantic links]]
* [[A taxonomy of argumentation models used for knowledge representation]]
* [[Back to the future: Dimensions revisited]]
* [[Bottom-up argumentation]]
* [[Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis]]

==Systems & Projects==
* [[But, see, accord: Generating "Blue Book" citations in HYPO]]
*[[Questions, Options, and Criteria: Elements of Design Space Analysis]]
* [[Zest: Discussion mapping for mailing lists]]
* [[Value-based argumentation for democratic decision support]] (Parmenides)
===IMPACT project===
* [[Towards a structured online consultation tool]]
* [[A framework for enriched, controlled on-line discussion forums for e-government policy-making]]
* [[Towards Web-based mass argumentation in natural language]]

===IBIS===
*[[IBIS--a convincing concept...but a lousy instrument]]
* [[Hypermedia support for argumentation-based rationale: 15 Years on from gIBIS and QOC]]

===ScholOnto===
* [[Ontological foundations for scholarly debate mapping technology]]
* [[Modelling discourse in contested domains: A semiotic and cognitive framework]]
* [[Modeling naturalistic argumentation in research literatures: Representation and interaction design issues]]

===WWAW===
*[[Mass argumentation and the semantic web]]
*[[Towards an argument interchange format]]

===Argument Zoning===
(publication order)
* [[Task-based evaluation of summary quality: Describing relationships between scientific papers]]
* [[An annotation scheme for discourse-level argumentation in research articles]]
* [[Discourse-level argumentation in scientific articles: Human and automatic annotation.]]
* [[What's yours and what's mine: Determining intellectual attribution in scientific text]]
* [[Argumentative Zoning for improved citation indexing]]
* [[Towards discipline-independent argumentative zoning: Evidence from chemistry and computational linguistics]]

====Work primarily based on Argument Zoning====
=====Legal domain=====
* [[Summarising legal texts: Sentential tense and argumentative roles]]
* [[Automatic detection of arguments in legal texts]]
* [[Study on sentence relations in the automatic detection of argumentation in legal cases]] -- really uses argument zoning little to not at all

=====Scientific papers=====
* [[Ontology-based modelling of related work sections in research articles: Using CRFs for developing semantic data based information retrieval systems]]

===Barcellini's studies of the Python community===
*[[Participation in online interaction spaces: Design-use mediation in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[User and developer mediation in an Open Source Software community: Boundary spanning through cross participation in online discussions]]
*[[A socio-cognitive analysis of online design discussions in an Open Source Software community]]
*[[A study of online discussion in an Open-Source community: reconstructing thematic coherence and argumentation from quotation practices]]
*[[Thematic coherence and quotation practices in OSS design-oriented online discussions]]

===Online argumentation===

==Frameworks and ontologies==
*[[An abstract framework for modeling argumentation in virtual communities]]
*[[Adding provenance and evolution information to modularized argumentation models]]
*[[Expressing argumentative discussions in social media sites]]

==Systems==
*[[Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 argumentation]] -- good discussion of what existing argumentation tools are lacking

*[[Integrating artificial intelligence, argumentation and game theory to develop an online dispute resolution environment]] -- dispute-resolution

==Linguistics==

===Argumentation Mining===
====Stance====
* [[Recognizing stances in ideological on-line debates]]

===Focus on Corpus Construction & Features Analysis for Machine Learning===
* [[How can you say such things?!?: Recognizing disagreement in informal political argument]] -- forum posts
* [[Cats rule and dogs drool!: Classifying stance in online debate]] -- debate systems (e.g. ConvinceMe)
** Journal version: [[That’s your evidence?: Classifying stance in online political debate]]

====Persuasion====
* [[A microtext corpus for persuasion detection in dialog]]
* [[Machine learning techniques for persuasion detection in conversation]]

===Focus on Discourse Analysis===
*[[Leave a reply: An analysis of weblog comments]]

===Social Experiments===
*[[Social validation of collective annotations: Definition and experiment]] - annotation

==Discourse Structures==
* [[Analyzing Discourse Structure to Coordinate Educational Forums]]

===Rhetorical Relations===
* [[Discourse-marking of concession and contrast in asynchronous online discussion]]
* [[Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: An assessment]]

==Semantic Web==
*[[Implementing Semantic Web applications: reference architecture and challenges]]

==Social Semantic Web==
*[[Produce and Consume Linked Data with Drupal!]]
*[[What Would It Mean to Blog on the Semantic Web?]]

==HCI & CSCW==
*[[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers]]
*[[FeedWinnower: layering structures over collections of information streams]]
* [[What is social informatics and why does it matter?]]
* [[Participatory mashups: Using users to make data mashable]]
* [[Seven privacy worries in ubiquitous social computing]]

==Health==
*[[Self-Control Relies on Glucose as a Limited Energy Source: Willpower Is More Than a Metaphor]]
*[[Predicting adverse drug events using pharmacological network models]]

==Ireland==
* [[The extent of clientelism in Irish politics: Evidence from classifying Dáil questions on a local-national dimension]]

==Scientific Communication, Scholarly Publishing==
*[[Endless Documents: A Publication as a Continual Function]]
*[[How to Review a Paper]]
* [[A wiki for Mizar: Motivation, considerations, and initial prototype]]
* [[New scenarios in scholarly publishing and debate]]
* [[Semantic Web and Social Web heading towards living documents in the life sciences]]

==Twitter==
* [[Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter]]
* [[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms]]
* [[Unsupervised modeling of Twitter conversations]]
* [[Twitter as a corpus for sentiment analysis and opinion mining]]

===ICWSM 2010===
* [[Characterizing microblogs with topic models]]
* [[From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series]]
* [[Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks]]
* [[Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy]]
* [[Microblogging inside and outside the workplace]]
* [[Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment]]

==Wikipedia summaries==
* [[Beyond Wikipedia: Coordination and conflict in online production groups]]
* [[Readers are not free-riders: Reading as a form of participation on Wikipedia]]
* [[What Wikipedia deletes: Characterizing dangerous collaborative content]]
* [[Enhancing Wikipedia with semantic technologies]] (for Research Newsleter)
* [[Biographical social networks on Wikipedia - A cross-cultural study of links that made history]]

===Talk pages===
* [[Behind the article: Recognizing dialog acts in Wikipedia talk pages]]
* [[There is no deadline - Time evolution of Wikipedia discussions]]

===Wikimania 2010 summaries===
* [[Judicial citation to Wikipedia in published federal court opinions]]
* [[Socialization tactics in Wikipedia and their effects]]
* [[Wikipedia leeches? The promotion of traffic through a collaborative web format]]

==General information science==
*[[Idea tactics]]
*[[Information search tactics]]

<hr>
==Summaries I might write if somebody else doesn't do it first:==
* [[The rhetorical parsing, summarization, and generation of natural language texts]]
* [[Construction of disambiguated folksonomy ontologies using Wikipedia]]
* Antoine Isaac & Ed Summers (ed), [[SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System primer]], W3C Working Group Note (2009), especially the Appendix "Correspondences between ISO-2788/5964 and SKOS constructs"
* Alistair Miles & Brian Matthews, [[Review of RDF thesaurus work]] (SWAD-Europe Project deliverable)
* Brian Matthews, Alistair Miles & Michael Wilson, "[[Modelling thesauri for the Semantic Web]]", submission to workshop on Semantic Web and Databases (2003)
* Various articles on information quality from the [http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RENDER_Bibliography RENDER bibliography]
* Robert Sanderson, Benjamin Albritton, Rafael Schwemmer, and Herbert Van de Sompel. SharedCanvas: a collaborative model for medieval manuscript layout dissemination. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998111 JCDL 2011, uses Linked Data to help present manuscripts
* David Bamman and Gregory Crane. 2011. Measuring historical word sense variation. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1998076.1998078 JCDL 2011, uses corpus statistics to automatically identify word sense variation in Latin:

==Articles I'd like somebody else to summarize:==
* [[The role of mentorship in protege performance]]
* [[Incidental haptic sensations influence social judgments and decisions]]
* The five most influential papers in usability (see [http://www.measuringusability.com/blog/five-papers.php list]:
:** [[Designing for usability: key principles and what designers think]]
:** [[Heuristic evaluation of user interfaces]]
:** [[Damaged merchandise? A review of experiments that compare usability evaluation methods]]
:** [[Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough?]]
:** [[Do usability evaluators agree on what usability problems are?]]
:Also their runners-up:
:** [[Tutorials for the first-time computer user]]
:** [[Human factors and usability]]
:** [[Testing small system customer setup]]
:** [[A mathematical model of the finding of usability problems]]
:** [[The evaluator effect in usability tests]]
* stuff from Jeff Jarvis' [http://www.buzzmachine.com/2010/07/07/publicness-bibliography/ Publicness bibliography]
* [[Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology‎]]
* [[The collapse of complex societies]] (see [http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2010/04/the-collapse-of-complex-business-models/ Shirky's summary])
* [[Dialogue games: An approach to discourse analysis]]

* via http://himsit.com/musings/facebook/
** James Coleman’s [[Social capital in the creation of human capital]]
** Robert Putnam’s [[Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital]]
** [[Impact of state-level social capital on the emergence of virtual communities]]
** [[The productivity paradox of information technology]] [http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632 DOI full-text]

* Psychology
** [[False-Positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant]]

Some Facets of Argument Mining for Opinion Analysis

2012-07-06T14:45:29Z

Jodi.a.schneider: Created page with "{{Summary |title=Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis |authors=Maria Garcia-Villalba and Patrick Saint-Dizier |url=http://www.irit.fr/~Patrick.Saint-Dizier/publi_f..."

{{Summary
|title=Some facets of argument mining for opinion analysis
|authors=Maria Garcia-Villalba and Patrick Saint-Dizier
|url=http://www.irit.fr/~Patrick.Saint-Dizier/publi_fichier/COMMA-submission10.pdf
|tags=opinion mining, online argumentation, argumentation mining
|summary=Villalba & Saint-Dizier discuss the problem of argument extraction in opinion texts, in order to understand and present deeper analysis of why consumers like or dislike a product. Their goal is to induce a system of preferences from attribute-value pairs and a recommendation, identifying these from a review which contains opinion (aka "evaluative") expressions.

They make two main claims:
(1) "evaluative expressions with a 'heavy' semantic load" can be interpreted as arguments and
(2) "that the association of an evaluative expression with a discourse structure such as an elaboration, an illustration, or a reformulation must also be interpreted as an argument".

In addressing claim (1):
They indicate that some, but not all, evaluative expressions function as arguments; they do not operationalize this, but merely provide descriptive examples. For instance:
"an expression in the hotel domain such as: clean rooms has no real argumentative power because 'clean' is a standard value for rooms"
In comparison, they say that "accueil familial (English gloss: you are welcomed as a family member)" incorporates an argument, since 'familial' has a rich semantic structure, with the probable interpretation: 'because the owners behave as if you were part of their family'. They describe this by saying that "'familial' is a higher-order adjective" -- yet this does not indicate how to determine or test which adjectives are "higher-order".
They see the list of adjectives and modifiers and the semantic features underlying the adjectives (which they envision as extracted and combined) as an "informal set of arguments".

In addressing claim (2):
They see the discourse structures accompanying evaluative expressions as "forms of explanation that realize argument schemas". But they do not construct the schemas.

They argue that, when combined with an evaluative expression, "elaborations, illustrations and other rhetorical relations related to explanation" acquire "argumentative power or orientation" by behaving "as argument supports and make explicit the semantic and pragmatic function of the support: e.g. they justify, illustrate, develop the evaluative expression".

They then detail, for various discourse relations, how they relate to the evaluations:

-Justification clarifies the reasons for an evaluation

Some types of elaboration support the evaluation:
-illustration
-enumeration ("adds strength")
-precision ("adds specific information")
-comparison ("reinforce a statement, making a parallel with a better or worse situation or object, more or less explicit")

Other types of elaboration stress the importance of the attribute:
-via consequence ("develops the advantages of a positive or a negative evaluation")

-Contrast and Concession generally weaken the evaluation

Some discourse relations do not really have argumentative force, such as reformulation.
|journal=Proceeding of the 2012 conference on Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2012
|pub_date=2012
|subject=Computer Science
}}

Economics and emigration: Trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk?

2012-05-14T16:36:48Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=Economics and Emigration: Trillion-Dollar Bills on the Sidewalk?
|authors=Michael Clemens
|url=http://aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/jep.25.3.83
|tags=economics, migration, emigration, immigration
|summary=Constraints on migration may have orders of magnitude greater negative impact on welfare than constraints on trade and investment -- trillions of dollars worth -- but is much less studied:
:“international trade” is 13 times more frequent than “international migration” in all the published article abstracts contained in the Research Papers in Economics (RePEc) archive. Furthermore, economists focus on arrival, not departure: in RePEc, “immigration” is four times as frequent as “emigration.”

All barriers, including non-policy barriers such as distance and language, amount to a 74% tariff on goods; price differences between the same goods in different markets are of the same magnitude. Unskilled labor compensation in different markets varies by 1000%.

Literature on of potential welfare increases due to elimination of barriers to international labor mobility includes four estimates, ranging form 67% to 147% of global GDP.

Author surveys four areas of research needed for further estimation:
* What are the External Effects of Migrants on Nonmigrants?
* What is the Elasticity of Labor Demand at the Origin and Destination?
* Is Labor Productivity Mostly about Who You Are, Or Where You Are?
* What Future Level of Emigration Is Feasible?

For the first three, author finds no hints so far that existing estimates are grossly incorrect, including data from past examples of mass migration and integration. Regarding the last, author notes:
:economists should be open to the possibility that dramatic changes in what is practical can happen over several decades. After all, changes in geographic labor mobility that were unthinkable only a few decades ago have come to pass. Through the 1980s, a Polish national attempting to emigrate to West Germany could be shot by soldiers sealing the Inner German border from the east. Today, Polish jobseekers may move freely throughout Germany. The world has summarily discarded vast systems of restrictions on the labor mobility of medieval serfs, slaves, women, South African blacks, indigenous Australians, and a long list of others.

Author briefly speculates about cause of relative lack of attention to emigration from economists, suggests that mercantilist tradition in economics of placing national standing above individual welfare could be one.
|relevance=Further media available at a page for a working paper version http://www.cgdev.org/content/publications/detail/1425376
|journal=Journal of Economic Perspectives
|pub_date=2011
|doi=10.1257/jep.25.3.83
|subject=Economics
}}

Featured Summaries

2012-05-14T16:34:30Z

Jodi.a.schneider: new

====Today's featured summary: Migration & money====
'''Paper Title:''' [[Economics and emigration: Trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk?]]
Constraints on migration may have orders of magnitude greater negative impact on welfare than constraints on trade and investment -- trillions of dollars worth -- but is much less studied.

[[Economics and emigration: Trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk?|Read more...]]
==== Today's featured summary: Studying pollution on the beaches of Malaysia ====
'''Paper Title:''' [[Characterization of alkanes, hopanes, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in tar-balls collected from the East Coast of Peninsular Malaysia]]
This paper uses oil residue or commonly known as tar-balls collected from beaches in Malaysia to point the sources of the oil (pollution). The authors uses the amount of hopanes in the tar-balls to know the location source of the residue. Alkanes and PAH are also used to determine the relative age of the tar-balls landed on the beach. The authors concluded that the almost all of the tar-residue in the east coast of Malaysia is local based (i.e oil plants from Terengganu). Only one sample is indicating long distance pollution (Norwegian crude oil).

[[Characterization of alkanes, hopanes, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in tar-balls collected from the East Coast of Peninsular Malaysia|Read more...]]

==== Today's featured summary: Social Network research in business information systems ====
'''Paper Title:''' [[Social Networks and Information Systems: Ongoing and Future Research Streams]]

This is an introduction to the JAIS special issue on social networks and information systems. It briefly acknowledges the increase in social network research and network analysis in IS field and accounts for some of its reasons. Furthermore, it categorizes the research stream in three divisions including
# network analysis helping to increase organizational and individual network awareness,
# organizational uses of information technology involving network analysis, and
# research issues related to platforms for managing social networks at individual, team, organizational, and inter-organizational levels.
[[Social Networks and Information Systems: Ongoing and Future Research Streams|Read more...]]

==== Today's featured summary: Trash Cans as part of a Sociotechnical System====
'''Paper Title:''' [[Social Complexity and the Role of the Object: Installing Household Waste Containers]]

This reading used a case study of an engineering project in a complex sociotechnical context (waste removal containers in a community where tourists and visitors frequently dumped trash in inappropriate places) as a way to discuss the differences between the ways we're able to "engineer" technologies and things and the ways we're able to "engineer" (if that's even an appropriate world) the behavior of social beings such as humans.
[[Social Complexity and the Role of the Object: Installing Household Waste Containers|Read more...]]

==== Featured Summary: Does paid vs. volunteer status change a profession?====
'''Paper Title:''' [[For love or money: Commodification and the construction of an occupational mandate]]

Nelsen spent eleven months as a participant-observer in four Emergency Medical Services (EMS) groups. She was trained as an EMS worker, and went on dozens of emergency response calls. She also interviewed a number of medical professionals (e.g. nurses, doctors) as well as firefighters and police officers who interacted with EMS workers.

After setting the theoretical stage (see below), Nelsen and Barley recount the history of EMS work. Volunteer EMS squads began to appear in the late '50s and it was only by the '90s that communities began relying on a mix of volunteers and professionals. A federal act in '73 recommended standardized training and certification for EMS workers, but made no requirement regarding their compensation (or lack thereof). There was therefore no preexisting social structure (law, in this case) that EMS workers could appeal to in order to justify and propagate their frame on their work.
[[For love or money: Commodification and the construction of an occupational mandate|Read more...]]

==== Featured Summary: Today's featured summary: How does the mother's education affect the health of her children? ====
'''Paper Title:''' [[Mother's education and the intergenerational transmission of human capital: Evidence from college openings]]

Currie and Moretti ask, ''Does increased maternal education result in increased infant health, and on a series of other factors that are likely to influence infant health?'' The goal of their analysis is to identify a causal effect of education on a set of non-labor market outcomes as a way of demonstrating positive externalities associated with education.

They focus on four key pathways though through which education might improve the health of infants:

# Prenatal care
# Marriage to higher earning men
# Inducement of woman to have healthier behavior (i.e., not smoking)
# Effect of education on fertility

In particular, they look at outcomes in terms of birth weigh and gestational age of children.

They use data taken from Vital Statistics Natality records from 1970 to 1999 a custom created dataset of college openings, and US Census PUMS data and the National Longitudinal Study of Youth for robustness checks.

They analysis focuses on two instrumental variables:

# The number of 2-year colleges that existed in the women's county in the year they were 17 years old divided by the number of 18-22 year olds in that county (expressed in 1000s).
# The number of 4-year colleges that existed in the women's county in the year they were 17 years old divided by the number of 18-22 year olds in that county (expressed in 1000s).

Their analysis includes county-year fixed effects to control for all observed and unobserved variation due to location in a particular county at a particular time.

They find that higher maternal education improves child "quality" in terms of their two outcomes and estimate that an additional year of education reduces the incidence of low birth weight by approximately 10 percent, and reduces the incidence of preterm birth by 6 percent.

They also evaluate and speak to two major threats to validity:

# An assumption that women are not mobile and that the county they give birth in is the one they were in at 17.
# Geographic location of new colleges is not likely to be random and colleges are like to be opening in places where education is already increasing or is expected to increase.
[[Mother's education and the intergenerational transmission of human capital: Evidence from college openings|Read more...]]

==== Featured Summary: Gender bias in recognizing facial expression? ====
'''Paper Title:''' [[The confounded nature of angry men and happy women]]

Imagine an angry face. What is its gender? A team led by D. Vaughan Becker asked this question to introductory psychology students and found that over three-fourths of the responses were "male."

There was no difference in the response based the respondent's gender. Both men and women are much more likely to think of a male "angry" face than a female one.

When asked to picture a happy face instead of an angry face, the results would switched almost as dramatically in the opposite direction: Most people say happy faces are female, although in this case, the effect is entirely due to male respondents. Women's responses are evenly divided male-female.

But the researchers weren't just interested in imagined faces. What they really wanted to know is if there's a gender bias in recognizing facial expressions. Are we more likely to perceive a male face as angry and a female face as happy? Are we quicker and better at recognizing angry faces in men compared to women? If we are, does this mean we're sexist?
[[The confounded nature of angry men and happy women|Read more...]]

==== Featured Summary: Switching costs: The keyboards we have, not the keyboards we want? ====
'''Paper Title:''' [[Clio and the economics of QWERTY]]

[[Clio and the economics of QWERTY]] is a beautiful, incitement and entertaining -- if stylistically idiosyncratic -- exploration of economic history in 5 pages.

In his short article, Paul A. David walks his reader through a detailed description of the history of the QWERTY keyboard layout and explains why QWERTY was selected over other (better!) alternatives like Dvorak.

He argues that QWERTY was "locked in" to its dominant market position through the widespread growth in touch typing. He attributes three key features to the arrangement: (1) technical interrelatedness, (2) economies of scale, and (3) quasi-irreversibility which he calls the ingredients of "QWERTY-nomics."

He describes technical interrelatedness as the requirement for system compatibility between keyboard "hardware" and the "software" represented by the touch typist's memory. Because this was high, meant that the expected present value of a typewriter as an instrument of production was dependent upon the availability of compatible software created by typists' decisions as to the kind of keyboard they should learn. As a result, as QWERTY grew, the cost of choosing it went down.

Economies of scale represented the idea that through network effects, each decision to choose QWERTY would increase the chance that the next person would use QWERTY. This fact means that even in a purely stochastic process, we would expect to see high concentration.

Quasi-irreversibility means that there is a very high cost (and increasingly high cost) of switching form QWERTY to anything else.
[[Clio and the economics of QWERTY|Read more...]]
==Featured Summary: Paved with well-intentions==
'''Paper Title:''' [[Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed]]

In this book, James Scott sets out to understand the logic behind what he calls “state simplifications”: the acts and mentality that lead to well-intentioned efforts to improve the human conditions through the creation of social order, rationalization and scientific knowledge. He argues that a few factors are necessary for this logic to become operational:
# the administrative ordering and legibility of the state as well as of nature;
# a high modernist ideology shared among elites;
# authoritarian state institutions;
# a prostrate civil society (see pp. 4-6).
In his empirical cases and chapters, he elaborates a position against the imperialism of such state logics and high modernist schemes, arguing instead for the recognition and empowerment of mētis (Greek for 'cunning intelligence'), the informal, practical and improvisational knowledges through which poor, disempowered, and non-elites manage their existence on a day-to-day basis. This summary focuses on explaining Scott's ideas of high modernism and mētis.

[[Seeing like a state: How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed|Read more...]]

== Featured Summary: Betweenness: quick to verify, hard to generate==
'''Paper Title:''' [[Total ordering problem]]

Proves the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NP-complete NP-completeness] of the total ordering problem: given finite sets S and R, where R is a subset of S x S x S, does there exist a total ordering of the elements of S such that for all (x, y, z) in R, either x < y < z or z < y < x? The reduction is from the hypergraph 2-colorability problem with edges of size at most 3.

This problem is in "Computers and Intractibility" by Garey and Johnson as problem MS1, the betweenness problem.
[[Total ordering problem|Read more...]]

== Featured Summary: PageRank for Twitter ==

'''Paper Title:''' [[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms]]

Compared 5 "prestige algorithms": PageRank, HITS, NodeRanking, TunkRank, TwitterRank on a large dataset: 28 million English tweets from 5 million users. TunkRank ([http://thenoisychannel.com/2009/01/13/ a-twitter-analog-to-pagerank/ description]) ([http://tunkrank.com implementation]) ([http://mendicantbug.com/2009/04/04/first-steps-towards-an-api-for-tunkrank/ API]) ([http://thenoisychannel.com/2010/07/13/the-war-on-attention-poverty-measuring-twitter-authority/ slides about]), which discounts reciprocal follows, is best.
[[Nepotistic relationships in Twitter and their impact on rank prestige algorithms|Read more...]]

==Featured Summary: Can we publish data and workflows, not just papers? ==

'''Paper Title:''' [[What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future]]

In this Perspective by the Editor-in-Chief of PLoS Computation Biology, the possibility of a completely integrated and public research ecosystem is explored. The author frames this in the context of a publisher, most likely due to his personal perspective as Editor-in-Chief, but a publisher-centric view is not a requirement of the analysis.

The main argument is that article publications are only one part of the production known as research and the other parts should also be published to be a part of the scholarly record. It is further argued that, with the advent of ubiquitous and cheap digital technologies, there is no excuse for not publishing those materials. The other, arguable equally or even more important, parts are grouped together under the term "workflow" and are comprised of the methods (software in some cases) and the data collected, analyzed, or used.
[[What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future|Read more...]]

==Featured Summary: Will the Internet create a new political order?==
'''Paper Title:''' [[Internet Galaxy Meets Postnational Constellation: Prospects for Political Solidarity After the Internet]]

Theorists have proposed that a postnational order could transcend nationalism and take on the responsibilities of the nation-state. Digital communications might facilitate the formation of solidarities beyond the nation. The author identifies four factors giving rise to solidarity that echo elements of Internet social relations:

# creation of a shared community with people who have never met but feel the share the same contingencies in life
# creation of meaning for shared community - a way of explaining the world
# new modes of political engagement reinforced by new community
# new modes of inclusion and exclusion that might be reinforced by new community

However, the following four counterpoints make it unlikely the Internet will give rise to solidarity that leads to further postnationalism:

# Anonymity makes the formation of new communities of solidarity less likely.
# Without obvious boundaries, it's hard for new communities to hold meaning -- the Internet is agnostic to human fatalities rather than giving them meaning as does a nation-state
# Potential for increased democratic engagement through the Internet is doubtful
# The digital divide and within that language divides may make the Internet merely the leading edge of social transformation

However, the Internet changes quickly. While there is nothing on the horizon, we may be looking in the wrong places -- e.g. the English-language Internet -- relatively excluded communities may be more likely to use the medium to form meaningful postnational solidarities.
[[Internet_Galaxy_Meets_Postnational_Constellation:_Prospects_for_Political_Solidarity_After_the_Internet|Read more...]]

== Featured Summary: Why Do People Donate to Charity? ==
'''Paper Title:''' [[A Signaling Explanation for Charity]]

Many people feel that donating to charity is purely an altruistic action. However, the authors of this paper suggest otherwise. Instead, they suggest that donating to charity in many cases is a way for people to conspicuously signal their wealth. As evidence, the authors looked at donations to a charity and found that the majority of donations came in at the minimum amount to make it to the next tier. For example, if the categories were between $0-$99, $100-$199, $200-$299 donations would be clustered at the $100 level and the $200 level. Economic theory suggests that donations should be more evenly distributed - that people should donate what they can pay. However, donations were clustered at the bottom of the next tier suggesting that people are making donations as a way of signaling.

In addition, the authors argue that donations are a better signal of wealth than things like luxury products. In many cases excessive conspicuous consumption is banned by social norms. One who is too gluttonous or showy is considered overly ostentatious. Second, luxury products are not always reliable signals because they can be faked. Donating to charity may actually be a more stable signal of wealth. [[A Signaling Explanation for Charity|Read more...]]

== Featured Summary: Arts and Crafts for Computer Interface Designers!==
'''Paper Title:''' [[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers]]

This paper advocates for lo-fi prototyping and describes the process of creating, testing, and improving upon a prototype.

"Lo-fi prototyping works because it effectively educates developers to have a concern for usability and formative evaluation, and because it maximizes the number of times you get to refine your design before you must commit to code."

=====Advice for building a lo-fi prototype=====
# Have arts&crafts supplies
# Set a deadline
# Make models with 'moving parts' to simulate interactivity

=====Advice for preparing for a test=====
# Find test users--make them realistic
# Prepare test scenarios
# Practice: try testing on your own group first
[[Prototyping for Tiny Fingers|Read more...]]''

==Featured Summary: Age and the Sociology of Fertility: How Old is Too Old?==

'''Paper Title:''' [[Age and the Sociology of Fertility: How Old is Too Old?]]
In this article Rindfuss and Bumpass argue that while age has a strong biological effect on fertility, biology is not the only way in which age affects fertility. There is also a sociological component. Age is an important consideration in a couple's decision with respect to the termination of fertility. Age also effects the choice of contraceptive method and the vigilance with which contraception is practiced.
[[Age and the Sociology of Fertility: How Old is Too Old?|Read more...]]''

== Featured Summary: Counting the Rational Numbers==

'''Paper Title:''' [[Recounting the Rationals: Twice!]]

This paper shows the derivation of an algorithm that enables the positive rationals to be enumerated in two different ways. One way is known; the second is new and corresponds to a flattening of the Stern-Brocot tree of rationals.
[[Recounting the Rationals: Twice!|Read more...]]''

== Featured Summary: Pro and Con lists aren't always a good move!==

'''Paper Title:''' [[On Making the Right Choice: The Deliberation-Without-Attention Effect]]

Remember the old wisdom of making a list with positives and negatives, consciously weighing them against each other, and then making a decision? It turns out this might not be such a great strategy in all types of decisions. The counter strategy of "just sleep on it" might actually be better under certain circumstances.

This paper highlights the value of unconscious decision making. The authors suggest that in simple decisions tasks with few attributes (such as deciding about a new pair of gloves), conscious decision-making is actually pretty good. However, in complex decisions-making tasks with many attributes, such as deciding between two houses, unconscious decision making works better.
[[On Making the Right Choice: The Deliberation-Without-Attention Effect|Read more...]]''

== Featured Summary: ''For Conflicts of Interest, Disclosure isn't a Cure''==

'''Paper Title:''' [[The Dirt on Coming Clean: Perverse Effects of Disclosing Conflicts of Interest]]

Common sense suggests recipients of advice will benefit if conflicts of interests are disclosed. In fact, many laws have been created in the fields of law, medicine, and finance to protect consumers from conflicts of interest.

If your doctor was on the payroll of a major pharmaceutical company, and then prescribed for you to take a drug made by this company, would you want her to disclose the conflict of interest? Common sense suggests that you’d be more protected if you were aware of it. In this paper, researchers ran experiments that might suggest otherwise. They found that if an adviser had a conflict of interest and told you, she would actually be able to influence you even more in her direction than if she hadn’t. In the case of the doctor, if she disclosed to you that she was on the payroll of the pharmaceutical, and then prescribed you their drug, you would more likely trust the doctor and take it.
[[The_Dirt_on_Coming_Clean:_Perverse_Effects_of_Disclosing_Conflicts_of_Interest|Read more...]]''

== Featured Summary: ''Do Points Make Us Do Random Things? '' ==

'''Paper Title:''' [[Medium Maximization]]

This paper shows how strategically adding "points" to a situation can dramatically change motivation and outcome. One group of students were given the choice between working for six minutes in exchange for a gallon of Haagen-Dazs vanilla ice cream, or working for seven minutes in exchange for a gallon of pistachio Haagen-Dazs ice cream. Given that six minutes of work is more attractive than seven, and vanilla ice cream is generally more desirable than pistachio, about three quarters of students chose the six minute task with vanilla ice cream.
[[Medium Maximization|Read more...]]

== Featured Summary: ''Identity and Political Affiliation'' ==

'''Paper Title:''' [[When_Beliefs_Yield_to_Evidence:_Reducing_Biased_Evaluation_by_Affirming_the_Self|'''When Beliefs Yield to Evidence: Reducing Biased Evaluation by Affirming the Self''']]

Our political affiliation doesn't just indicate what we believe - it affirms "who we are" - our identity. One reason people may cling to their political beliefs is because they are protecting their identity. Thus, it follows that if you make people feel better about who they are by affirming their identity - say having them reflect on their sense of humor - they would be more open to diverse political beliefs, and we may end up in less of a red state vs. blue state deadlock.
[[When_Beliefs_Yield_to_Evidence:_Reducing_Biased_Evaluation_by_Affirming_the_Self|Read more...]]

Home

2012-05-14T16:33:34Z

Jodi.a.schneider: new featured summary

{{Languages}}
{{Topbanner}}__NOTITLE____NOTOC____NOEDITSECTION__
{| id="mp-upper" style="width: 100%; margin:0 0 0 0; background:none; border-spacing: 0px;"
| class="MainPageBG" style="width:55%; border:1px solid #cef2e0; background:#f5fffa; vertical-align:top; color:#000;" |
{| id="mp-left" style="vertical-align:top; background:#f5fffa;"
! style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-tfa-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cef2e0; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Sharing summaries of academic papers</h2>
|-
| style="color:#000;" | <div class="floatleft plainlinks" style="margin-left: 5px;">
[http://acawiki.org/Special:BrowseData/Summary http://acawiki.org/images/0/07/Read.png]
</div> <div id="mp-tfa" style="padding:2px 5px">There are currently over {{PAGESINCATEGORY:Summary}}
 [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Creative Commons (CC-BY) licensed] summaries of academic papers on AcaWiki. Browse summaries in [http://acawiki.org/Special:BrowseData/Summary?Subject=Economics economics], [http://acawiki.org/Special:BrowseData/Summary?Subject=Psychology psychology], [http://acawiki.org/Special:BrowseData/Summary?Subject=Sociology sociology], [http://acawiki.org/Special:BrowseData/Summary?Subject=Business business], or [http://acawiki.org/Special:BrowseData/Summary?Subject=Computer_Science computer science] and more.</div>
|-
! style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-dyk-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cef2e0; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3bfb1; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">Make your research known: post a summary </h2>
|-
| style="color:#000; padding:2px 5px 5px;" | <div class="floatleft plainlinks" style="margin-left: 0px;">
[http://acawiki.org/Special:AddData/Summary http://acawiki.org/images/9/9c/Post.png]
</div> <div id="mp-dyk">AcaWiki enables you to easily [[Special:AddData/Summary|post summaries]] and [[AcaWiki:Literature_Reviews|literature reviews]] of peer-reviewed research. Many summaries on AcaWiki come up high on Google results. Please read our [[Acawiki:Posting Guidelines|posting guidelines]] before proceeding. If you want to find summaries or literature reviews of peer-reviewed research, you can either [[Special:BrowseData/Summary|browse summaries]] or [[Special:Search|search]].</div>
|}
| style="border:1px solid transparent;" |

| class="MainPageBG" style="width:45%; border:1px solid #cedff2; background:#f5faff; vertical-align:top;"|
{| id="mp-right" style="width:100%; vertical-align:top; background:#f5faff;"
! style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-itn-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#cedff2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #a3b0bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em;">[[AcaWiki: News Archive|News]]: Seeking top 100 papers</h2>
|-
| style="color:#000; padding:2px 5px;" | <div id="mp-itn">We need your help to summarize the '''[[AcaWiki:Top_100_Papers|Top 100 Papers]]''' in 20 academic research domains. With your expertise, we'll succeed.</div>
|}
|}
{| id="mp-lower" style="margin:4px 0 0 0; width:100%; background:none; border-spacing: 0px;"
| class="MainPageBG" style="width:100%; border:1px solid #ddcef2; background:#faf5ff; vertical-align:top; color:#000;"|
{| id="mp-bottom" style="vertical-align:top; background:#faf5ff; color:#000; width:100%"
! style="padding:2px;" | <h2 id="mp-tfp-h2" style="margin:3px; background:#ddcef2; font-size:120%; font-weight:bold; border:1px solid #afa3bf; text-align:left; color:#000; padding:0.2em 0.4em">Today's featured summary: Migration & money</h2>
|-
| style="color:#000; padding:2px;" | <div id="mp-tfp">'''Paper Title:''' [[Economics and emigration: Trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk?]]
Constraints on migration may have orders of magnitude greater negative impact on welfare than constraints on trade and investment -- trillions of dollars worth -- but is much less studied.

[[Economics and emigration: Trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk?|Read more...]]
</div>
|}
|}

Economics and emigration: Trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk?

2012-05-14T16:32:03Z

Jodi.a.schneider: moved Economics and Emigration: Trillion-Dollar Bills on the Sidewalk? to Economics and emigration: Trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk?: AW:SC

Economics and Emigration: Trillion-Dollar Bills on the Sidewalk?

2012-05-14T16:32:03Z

Jodi.a.schneider: moved Economics and Emigration: Trillion-Dollar Bills on the Sidewalk? to Economics and emigration: Trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk?: AW:SC

#REDIRECT [[Economics and emigration: Trillion-dollar bills on the sidewalk?]]

There is no deadline - Time evolution of Wikipedia discussions

2012-04-30T21:26:47Z

Jodi.a.schneider:

{{Summary
|title=There is No Deadline - Time Evolution of Wikipedia Discussions
|authors=Andreas Kaltenbrunner and David Laniado
|url=http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.3453
|tags=Wikipedia, Social Networks, dynamics, time evolution, Talk pages, Wikipedia Talk pages,
|summary=Kaltenbrunner and Laniado look at the time evolution of Wikipedia discussions, and how it correlates to editing activity, based on 9.4 million comments from the March 12, 2010 dump [7]. Peaks in commenting and peaks in editing often co-occur (for sufficiently large peaks of 20 comments, 63% of the time) within 2 days. They show the articles with the longest comment peaks and most edit peaks, and the 20 slowest and 20 fastest discussions.

They note that a single, heavy editor can be responsible for edit peaks but not comment peaks; peaks in the discussion activity seem to indicate more widespread interest by multiple people. They find that "the fastest growing discussions are more likely to have long lasting edit peaks" and that some editing peaks are associated with event anniversaries. They use the Barack Obama article as a case study, showing peaks in comments and editing due to news events as well as to internal Wikipedia events (such as an editor poll or article protection). Current events are often edited and discussed in nearly real-time in contrast to articles about historical or scientific facts.

They use the h-index to assess the complexity of a discussion, and they chart the growth rate of the discussions. For instance, they find that the discussion pages of the three most recent US Presidents show a constant growth in comments but that the rate of growth varies: Bill Clinton's Talk page took 332 days to increase h-index by one, while George W. Bush's took only 71 days.

"Wikipedia discussions can thus be seen as a mirror of a stream of public consciousness, where those elements which are still not part of a shared consolidated heritage are object of a continuous negotiation among different points of view"
|relevance=Could be used for *all articles* in addition to page views and edit count to understand page activity.

They envision more sophisticated algorithms showing the relative growth in edits and discussions. Their ideas for future work are intriguing, for instance to determine article maturity and the level of consensus, based on the network dynamics.
|journal=arxiv
|subject=Computer Science
}}