1 / 15

Dr. Liana Razmerita Centre of Applied Information and Communication Technologies

Modeling Behaviour of the Users in Adaptive and Semantic-enhanced Information Systems: The Role of a User Ontology. Dr. Liana Razmerita Centre of Applied Information and Communication Technologies Copenhagen Business School. Presentation Outline. Introduction Context of research - KMS

lotta
Download Presentation

Dr. Liana Razmerita Centre of Applied Information and Communication Technologies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Modeling Behaviour of the Users in Adaptive and Semantic-enhanced Information Systems: The Role of a User Ontology Dr. Liana Razmerita Centre of Applied Information and Communication Technologies Copenhagen Business School

  2. Presentation Outline • Introduction • Context of research - KMS • Motivation- painpoints of the actual KM tools • Research Questions • Ontology-based User Modeling • Conclusions and Outlook Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  3. Context of research • Knowledge Management Systems (KMS)- information systems dedicated to manage organizational knowledge (Leidner and Alavi, 2001). • Semantic-enhanced KMSs - Domain ontologies can improve KMS within organizations and among distributed web-comunities (Maedche et al., 2002, Velardi et al, 2007) • KMS integrate complex knowledge processes: • Support social processes: ks, kc. • Collaboration between employees; • Learning processes; • Management of tacit knowledge; • KM 1.0, KM 2.0, KM3.0 –semantic-enhanced Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  4. Limitations of current KMSs • Need to better organize knowledge • “Content is not correctly organized, not updated or [is] duplicated.” • Need for better knowledge filtering and user support • “These tools need major improvement to allow users [to] • use knowledge tools in an easy way, • spend less time and • avoid getting lost among hundreds of document”, • ”Save time when I am looking for a solution” • Need to better manage tacit knowledge • “To know what people know and to make their experience with technology and products accessible”. Source: Survey on KMS (n=16 Ontologging End-Users ) Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  5. Research Questions • Why is it important to model users of a KMS? • What are the relevant characteristics of the users of a KMS? • What type of user’s behavior can be distinguished in a KMS? • How to track and maintain the user models in a KMS? • What are the advantages/limitations of applying ontologies in user modeling? • How to make us of the metadata? • How can a user model improve the interaction with a KMS? • What type of intelligent /personalized services can be provided based on the user’s characteristics? • How to build semantic-enhanced data models? • What are the perspectives of its use in the context of the Semantic Web? Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  6. Related Work • User Modeling Research • Adaptive hypermedia and personalized interactions (Kobsa, 2002),(Brusilovsky, 2007),(Cristea et al., 2007) • Ontology-based user modeling (Razmerita et al., 2003)(Kay and Lum, 2005)(Heckman et al., 2005, 2007) (Katifori et al., 2008) • Semantic Web and Ontology Research • Ontology-based personalization: Dolog and Nejdl(2007) EPOS (Schwarz and Roth-Berghofer,2002), Elena(Dolog et. al., 2003); (Henze et al. 2004) • Ontology, agents and corporate memory: FRODO(Van Elst & Abecker, 2001), CoMMA(Gandon and Dieng-Kuntz, 2001) • Knowledge Management Systems • (O’Leary &Studer, 2001), (Nonaka et al. 2001), (Fischer & Ostwald, 2001) Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  7. From Ontology-based Knowledge Modeling to Ontology-based User Modeling Integration of 2 different specifications for user model by 2 Spanish companies Building a user ontology is not simple! How achieve an agreed conceptualization, integrate specific characteristics of users interacting with KMS, completeness? Adapt a methodology proposed by [Uschold and Gruninger, 1996] Step1 Specification phase • The use of IMS LIP specification • Extends IMS LIP-upper ontology Step 2 The process of coding • KAON tool suite and Web ontology language extending RDF/RDFS Step 3 The process of integrating with existing ontologies • The definition of similar concepts as synonyms • Different representation languages Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  8. OI-Modeler View of User Ontology Behavior Concept TypeOfActivity LevelOfActivity LevelOfKnowledge- Sharing Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  9. Ontology-based User Modeling framework (OntobUMf) (Razmerita et al. 2003, Razmerita 2007) Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  10. Intelligent Service: category extractor • Categories of users obtained by processing the logs (heuristics + fuzzy logic); • Type of Activity: Readers/ Writers/ Lurkers; If (nb_of_read_papers>NR) and (nb_of_contributions <NC) then user(x) =”reader” (during timeframe) If (nb_of_contributions>=NC) then user(x) =”writer” (during timeframe) …. • Level of Activity: Very Active/Active/Visitor/Inactive; If (nb_of_read_papers > NR) and (nb_of_contributions >=NC+1) then user(x) = “very active“ …. If (nb_of_read_papers =0) and (nb_of_contributions =0) Then user(x) = “inactive” (during timeframe) Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  11. Intelligent Service: category extractor • Level of Knowledge Sharing: Unaware, Aware, Interested, Trial, Adopters Y=f(x1, x2)– [very high, high, medium, low, very low] x1 the type of activity: [high, medium, low] x2 the level of activity: [high, medium, low, very low] The calculus of the level of knowledge sharing Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  12. Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  13. Findings-some evaluation results • Users are concerned with privacy and trust: • User’s profile should be only partial available in a KMS; • Users want to be in control and to maintain their profiles; • The use of combo box would facilitate the acquisition of the user’s data and the consistency of the terminology; • Ontologging end-users identify recognition and promotion as key incentive for knowledge sharing Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  14. Summary • A top-down approach in building a user ontology using IMS LIP specification-lack of ”know-how” on how to build an ontology? • User ontology extending IMS LIP (Information Management Systems Learning Information Package) • A standard/a specification can be usefull but can be limitative. • Ontology-based UM framework • User Behavior (level of activity, type of activity, level of knowledge sharing) Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

  15. Future work • Extending OntobUMf towards its use within KM2.0 (blogs, wikis) • OntobUMf in an e-learning scenario: • LevelofActivity/TypeofActivity/LevelofKnowledge Liana Razmerita, Adaptive Hypermedia, 29/07/08

More Related