• Andrea Omicini
    Andrea Omicini, 16/06/2015 19:09

    Dear Andrea,

    we are happy to inform you that your paper number 18, titled

     Anticipatory Coordination in Socio-technical Knowledge-intensive Environments: Behavioural Implicit Communication in MoK

    has been accepted for publication at AI*IA 2015. Congratulations!

    Please find herein enclosed the reviews of the referees; please take them into the fullest consideration when preparing the camera- ready version.

    The camera-ready is due on

     the 15th of July

    The deadline is strict! In case you cannot send the camera-ready on time, we will be unable to include your paper in the proceedings. Please use the LNCS style and check that the paper is at most 12 pages long, excluding the bibliography. The style files can be downloaded from:

    http://www.springer.com/comp/lncs/Authors.html Next week we will send information on how to upload the camera ready version.

    Note that at least one author must register to the conference within the 5th of July in order to have the paper included in the proceedings. The registration will open next week; please check the web site of the conference

    http://aixia2015.unife.it/

    for other information.

    Congratulations again, and we are looking forward to see you soon in Ferrara,

    Marco, Evelina and Fabrizio


     REVIEW 1 

    PAPER: 18 TITLE: Anticipatory Coordination in Socio-technical Knowledge-intensive Environments: Behavioural Implicit Communication in MoK AUTHORS: Stefano Mariani and Andrea Omicini

    OVERALL EVALUATION: 3 (strong accept) Best paper award: 2 (Nominate for the best paper award)


     REVIEW 

    In this paper the authors propose a novel approach to coordination in socio-technical Knowledge Intensive Environment. They extended the already developed Molecules of Knowledge model to support the notion of anticipatory coordination, a form of collective intelligence arising by emergence from a number of distributed non-intelligent agents. The study regards the field of coordination models and technologies inspired by distributed collective intelligence phenomena in natural systems, and provide promising results obtained from the execution of an experiment on the citizen journalism scenario for retrieving and publishing news stories as an early validation of the model.

    The paper is definitively very good and shows scientific and practical maturity, and extensions of previous works are well defined. I recommend describing better the experimental part, which could be interesting for discussions and for methodological issues (some point are obscure and qualitative, but the author declare that it is a first step for the validation of the proposed extensions of previous works. The paper could give a very good contribution to the Conference.


     REVIEW 2 

    PAPER: 18 TITLE: Anticipatory Coordination in Socio-technical Knowledge-intensive Environments: Behavioural Implicit Communication in MoK AUTHORS: Stefano Mariani and Andrea Omicini

    OVERALL EVALUATION: 1 (weak accept) Best paper award: 1 (Do not nominate for the best paper award)


     REVIEW 

    This paper presents an extension of the MoK framework introduced elsewhere in order to model anticipatory coordination in STS. The paper is interesting but it would benefit from more practical examples for readers that have no knowledge about applications of the MoK framework. The paper makes a good job to introduce all concepts but it really lacks of an intuitive and still concrete example.

    Correlation between actions and goals is not really clear (sec. 3.3.). For example, pag. 8, "goal - X has goal g", who supplies the knowledge that a certain workflow is aimed at achieving a certain goal? How to guarantee that a certain action belongs to a certain workflow? (does an action belong to just one workflow?)

    In general, Sommerville, in his SE book, characterizes STS by a social layer represented by social relationships and norms. The ability of performing anticipatory coordination is related to the ability of performing a sort of normative reasoning. Which is the relation between your proposal and Sommerville's approach?

    In general, the paper is interesting as well as the approach, however the presentation would benefit of some intuitive examples and of a comparison with classical approaches.


     REVIEW 3 

    PAPER: 18 TITLE: Anticipatory Coordination in Socio-technical Knowledge-intensive Environments: Behavioural Implicit Communication in MoK AUTHORS: Stefano Mariani and Andrea Omicini

    OVERALL EVALUATION: 2 (accept) Best paper award: 1 (Do not nominate for the best paper award)


     REVIEW 

    Unfortunately I am not qualified to properly review this paper. The paper seems to be solid, well-structured and well-motivated, but mine is more an impression than a judgement, since there are many things that I didn't understand, and probably it would be impossible to understand them without reading the related literature. I must say I stopped at page 4, since after reading the description of the MoK model several times I wasn't able to grasp it.

    Please find below my comments up to page 4.

    p. 1, definition of STS: I don't think a STS should necessarily "evolve". I think it is better to talk of "behaviour" than "evolution"

    p. 2: 

    I don't understand the difference between KIE and STS. In particular, I don't understand in which sense "KIE are computationally supported by STS". It seems to me that many STS are knowledge-intensive, and vice versa many knowledge-intensive systems do have a socio-technical nature. Indeed, in the conclusions you use the term "socio-technical KIE", but the introduction seems to introduce the two notions as separate.

    I don't understand in which sense data are "consumed". Typically, data are used but not consumed, in the sense that the same data can be used several times.

    p.3:

    You say that, to fully support BIC-based coordination, agents should be able to understand actions and their traces. But a few lines above you say that in a common environment agents observe only the state of the environment, not the actions of their peers. It seems that a common environment is still able to support BIC, so I am confused.

    p. 4:

    I really can't understand the chemical metaphors. A concrete example would have been useful.

Partita IVA: 01131710376 - Copyright © 2008-2022 APICe@DISI Research Group - PRIVACY