WP8 Support and Services

1. WP8 Support and Services Jannicke Baalsrud Hauge, BIBA Riccardo Berta, Francesco Belotti, UniGe Yulia Bachvarova, Cyntelix

2. Objectives • Provide support and services for the different research, integrating and outreach activities- two major categories of services: collaboration and dissemination • Offer tools and services for collaboration between internal and external partners reducing the fragmentation • Set-up, implement and maintain Virtual Research Environment (VRE) able to support effective international and multi-disciplinary • Set-up of a pan-European SG Living Lab Network (SGLLN). • SGLLN will support the innovation within the development and application of SG. • Application of different social network analysis tools

3. Time tables • 3tasks, 8 deliverables Task 8.2 M6 Gala Social Network analysis approach M24 Community metricsreport M8:GaLA VRE Requirements M12: LL Requirements M12GaLA VRE Release

4. VirtualResearchEnvironment (VRE) ELIOS Lab – DIBE – University of Genoa

5. 2 VRE deliverables • D8.1 VRE requirements • Objectives • Background • State of the art • GaLA User Needs • VRE requirements • Towards system specifications • D8.3 VRE release • Design • Implementation

6. Objectives • The VRE is the technological platform of the GaLA Virtual Research Center (VRC), a major long-term target of the project • Close collaboration and integration among the actors that represent excellence in Serious Game (SG) research in Europe • Open to cooperation also by third parties. • Basic requirements: • facilitate the sharing of knowledge, methodologies, data and tools • Collaborative collection, manipulation and management of data, as well as collaborative knowledge creation • Effective and seamless access to distributed research resources (applications, data, grid computing, web 2.0 style collaboration tools, etc) • High user friendliness, modularity and interoperability

7. Background • A sample definition • “A system to provide researchers with the tools and services they need to do research of any type as efficiently and effectively as possible” [Borda, 2006] • Other similar terms • CVE (Collaborative Virtual Environment), Cyberinfrastructure/e-Infrastructure, Collaborative e-Research Communities, VRC (Virtual Research Community), VO (Virtual Organisation), Collaboratory, Science Gateway • Challenges: • Long-term sustainability • Provide a service meeting the needs of the community, exploit. plan • Barriers • Critical mass of users, multidisciplinary

8. State of the art (I) • Scientific workflow management • Probably the most important application for scientific VREs • Typical domains: climate modeling, structural biology, chemistry, disaster recovery simulation • Kepler, Galaxy, OpenWetWare, NanoHub • Thematic VREs • TextGrid, ArcheoGrid, Esad, MemRE, VeRSI

9. State of the art (II) • Tools and systems for VREs • MyExperiment • Scientific workflows, repository, tailored social website, open source community, auctioning research • Microsoft Research Information Center (RIC) • Publications, sub-sites, project resource management, collaboration tools • eSciDoc (Max Planck Institute) • Support for publications and research (metadata) • Sakai • Oriented to the e-learning field • Enterprise Content Management (ECM) / Knowledge Management Engineering (KME) systems • IBM FileNet Content Management, HP TRIM, Microsoft SharePoint, Open Text ECM, Oracle Universal Content Management, EMC Documentum ECM, Alfresco Software (Open source)

10. State of the art • Basic approaches to support de-fragmentation • Classification of SGs • Djaouti, Alvarez, Jessel • serious.gameclassification.com (2289 featured games) • Design Patterns • Design Patterns in Serious Games: A Blue Print for Combining Fun and Learning, Huynh-Kim-Bang et Al, Univ P&M Curie, Paris • K. Killi, Call for Learning-Game Design Patterns • Ontologies • Zagal et al., Game Ontology Project • Blogging to understand games • Zagal et Al., GameLog project

11. Serious Game Classification • A collaborative classification of SGs • Classification according: • Gameplay • Game-based, Play-based • Core rules represented by bricks • Purpose • Edu, info, marketing, subjective msg broadcast, training, goods trading, storytelling • Market • Entertainment, State&Govern, Milit&Defence, Healthcare, Educ, Corporate, Relig, Culture&Art, Ecology, Politics, Humanit& Carit, Media, Advert, Sci Res • Audience • Age groups • Type (General Public, Professionals, Students) • User-contributed keywords

12. Game Ontology Project (GOP) • GOP is a framework for describing, analyzing and studying games. It is a hierarchy of concepts abstracted from an analysis of many specific games • The GOP's approach is to develop a game ontology that identifies the important structural elements of games and the relationships between them • Tree hierarchy • Inheritance and part-of relationships • Top branches: interfaces, rules, entity manipulation, goals • Nodes = game components • Definition • Strong examples • Weak examples

13. GaLA user requirements survey • Survey organized along the VRE’s three major modules: • Project Management tools • Collaboration tools • Social networking. • Early feedback on the existing GaLA collaboration area • Early release less than one month before (january 2011) • Online survey online • 36 respondents

14. User requirements results • Functionalities for PM • High importance of document repository and of contact management • Collaboration tools • The 3 most rated items are similar and specifically dedicated to SG: • Databases for games and related research, ordered repository of SGs and use cases of SGs • This suggests the importance of the availability of a tool specifically dedicated to support SG research • Social networking • Group management is the most favorite feature • Items of interest: • interest management and sharing, support for online events, support for presence and exchange and showcasing • Surprisingly, those parameters that are sold as major features of dedicated social VRE (e.g., reputation management, IP management and ownership, crediting, attribution) are rated the lowest

15. Overall GaLA VRE requirements • Sources: • literature survey, VRE questionnaire, EU indications, experience from GaLA works and meetings • Major requirements • Address fragmentation • A common language across the Multiple disciplines, background and interests involved in the world of SG applications • A deeper understanding of SGs (need for a specific support to collaborative research on SGs) • Need for a cooperation between business and academia • Need for supporting a community of practice of heterogeneous stakeholders • High usability • Support for social networking (Del. 8.8)

16. Towards system specifications • The SG field is too in an early stage to have as a priority the support for workflow management • Researches in the field have to work to shape the field in order to understand and design new workflows • Focus on the creation of a common vocabulary (e.g. taxonomies, data, standards and metadata) that allows researchers from different fields (pedagogy, psychology, computer science, game design, etc.) to understand each other and develop a common understanding

17. Overall need • Build an operationally exploitable network of knowledge • Link among games, mechanisms, pedagogical theories, assessment methods, deployment modes, development tools, business models, research papers, etc. • Several VREs very efficient to support PM, general remote collaboration and social networking, none of them is able to meet the need for supporting a harmonized view on the complex world of SGs • (including research, development, marketing, deployment) • Addressing fragmentation and becoming a reference point for R&D in the world. • This requires exploiting lower-level tools and systems to build key specific modules for a SG VRE.

18. High-level view of the VRE (I) • 3 major modules • Support for collaboration and project management • Joomla-based GaLA website (Del 9.3) • Shared calendar, definition of WPs, tasks and milestone, assignment of responsibilities to users (e.g. WP coordination); definition of timing (e.g. WP deadlines); shared repository of documents; communication channel (e.g. forum and news feed on call for papers, projects and publications); list of contacts; support for collaborative writing of deliverable and papers with versioning and credentials (e.g. wiki support); online surveys; meeting management. • The wiki and forums comply with the UGC requirements for Social Networking, as requested in Del. 8.8. • Additional tools are taken off-the-shelf from widely spread, excellence packages/services, such as Skype for call-conference and Mendeley for reference management • Standard choices in GaLA, in order to avoid confusion when carrying-out collaborative activities that may be implemented through several different instruments. This homogeneity was a clear requirement by partners.

19. High-level of the VRE (II) • Support for communities • This part of the VRE is developed in the context of the Young Academy (YA) network – Del 5.1 • Elgg technology • Database of people with profile; possibility of friendship and following; • Smart presence on popular SNs (WP9, Del 8.8)

20. High-level view of the VRE (III) • Support for SG field definition • The most innovative and important part of VRE, developed to support the community of researchers • A repository of SGs described in a multidisciplinary way • Enabling technology: Knowledge Management Engineering (KME) • Alfresco seems a good solution, providing the standard features for repository and search functionalities in a low-cost, open source and small footprint ECM solution • Strength in core document management and content services, provides a unified repository, and excels in extensibility • Build a system as a network of entities • Organization in hierarchical ontologies with descriptions and examples (strong and weak) • Texts, keywords and other multimedia assets deemed as useful • Links among entities

21. 6 knowledge areas • Description/classification of SGs • Similar to serious.gameclassification.com, with which content interoperability will be studied and implemented • Other synergies could be set-up with the GameLog project • Analysis of game components (UI, rules, goals, entity manipulation, assessment) • Game Ontology Project reference • Pedagogy (TC pedag) • The GaLA ontology may be organized in Learning goals (Blooms?) and pedagogical paradigms (GEL): • Deployment (WP6 and WP7) • Target users • Types of use (e.g., curricular, corporate training, leisure time) • Application domains (TCs) • E.g., Business & finance, cultural heritage, health, manufacturing, etc. • Technologies (SIGs) • Platforms, tools, algorithms

22. VRE design (I) • - SG Descr. & Classifi. • Apps • Deploy • Tech.s

23. VRE design (II)

24. D8.3 VRE release • Structure will be ready by the time of the review • Contents not yet filled, but a lot of them is available (in electronic) on the GaLA wiki (as reported in the TC/SIG deliverables)

25. Task 8.2: D8.4 Serious Games Living Lab Requirements WP 8

26. The living lab concept • “Living Labs are environments for innovation and development where users are exposed to new ICT solutions in (semi)realistic contexts, as part of medium- and long-term studies targeting evaluation of new ICT solutions and discovery of innovation opportunities” Folstad (2008, p 116) .

27. Pan-European SG Living Lab Network (SGLLN) Objective • support the innovation within the development and application of SG. • offer researchers the possibility to test and evaluate their games on a larger scale as well as to support collaborative research. • increase the joint multi-disciplinary research • focusing on the integration of research activities • Supporting collaboration among stakeholders • targeted at bringing the developers and application users together. • Various methods and approaches will be used, building on the successful example of the Serious Games Institute at Coventry University

28. SGLL Configuration • Two possible different configurations: • designed to utilize context simulations. The conditions in these Living Labs are used for the specific research goal. • real world Living Labs allow users in the “real” world to experience and experiment with ICT solutions. Vary strongly in terms of size and geographical distribution. • The decision for one of the two concepts depends on variables like available resources and the parameters of the ICT solution to be tested

29. Why LL in GALA? The task is to catalyze, organize and attract regional stakeholders for innovating SGs. Various methods and approaches will be used, building on the successful example of the Serious Games Institute at Coventry University

30. Contributionof LL todefragmentation • Two parts: Local and Virtual • NODES: UK (managed by UniCov), Iberian node (managed by INESC-ID), a central European node (BIBA), South Europe node (DIBE) • virtual living lab supports collaboration among the geographically distributed stakeholder as well as several local established living labs • The Gala Living labs are multidisciplinary. Should cover the topics of the TCs and SIGs • Will serve two large groups • will provide users an access to several different games in an easy way. • large test bed in which the developers can test and collect feedback on their games

31. Community Nurturing (Task 8.3)Social Network Analysis Approach (D8.8) WP 8

32. Outline • Theory for online communication – Communities of Practice • Conditions for establishing communities of practice • Social Network Analysis • SNA measures • SNA enhanced techniques • Approach for SNA in GaLA

33. Communities of Practice • “Communities of Practice (CoP) are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly.” (Wenger, 2008) • A CoP is an activity system in which individuals are united in action and the meaning that the actions have for them (Ardichvili, Page, & Wentling, 2003). • CoP provide a foundation for production and sharing of knowledge

34. Establishing Communities of Practice • Identification of stakeholders • People with experience and knowledge on the topic have to be present • 20:80 rule - peripheral participants, the long-tail (Anderson, 2003) • Common recognized and shared needs and a belief in long term profitability of stakeholders

35. Establishing Communities of Practice • Engagement • Very challenging, but crucial for success (allows the exchange of tacit knowledge) • Conditions for promotion and stimulation of engagement • Self-reflection and self-observation • Promote sharing of knowledge as a public good • Effect of recommendations from influential contacts • Trust in the way knowledge is used or disseminated by procedures of knowledge or trusted members

36. Establishing Communities of Practice • Network management • Stimulate sharing • Instigate agreement • Need for leadership: especially important in the early stages of community development. If no leader is appointed the community itself will set out and find one (Laghos & Zaphiris, 2006) • Balance between support (guidelines and regulations) and freedom ( evolving interests and circumstances that help the community to develop)

37. Social Network Analysis • SNA Measures • Clustering • Connectivity • Centrality • Network characteristics • Strength of the weak ties • Small world; six degrees of separation • Enhanced SNA techniques • Recommender systems • Collaborative filtering • Content based recommendation

38. Approach for SNA in GaLA Community lifecycle

39. Approach for SNA in GaLA • SNA for the Potential Stage • Connect people with similar interests (look at the profile information) • Check how the different stakeholders are represented and take adequate measures • Support engagement by motivating sharing • SNA for the Coalescing Stage • Detect clustering and subgroups and the level of communication between these • Use collaborative filtering and content-based recommendation to enhance engagement by recommending suitable contacts and content

40. Approach for SNA in GaLA • SNA for the Active Stage • Measure engagement by keeping track of the quantity of members’ contributions (blog posts, comments, rating) and the rate of information flow • Detect the ‘central’ people and support them in case the burden of managing the network increases • Use content analysis to study the relation between the content generated and the relation between content authors • Data needed • User profile: • information about interests and roles (e.g. researcher in a private company) • Common anagraphic data (age, gender)

41. Approach for SNA in GaLA • Data needed • User profile: • information about interests and roles (e.g. researcher in a private company) • Common anagraphic data (age, gender) • Role and affiliation to detect belonging to a particular stakeholder group • Interest to suggest similar community member • The social links (friend/follower) • All user-generated content • Blog posts • Comments • Rating • Tagging