• Andrea Omicini
    Andrea Omicini, 25/02/2013 19:17

    Dear Andrea,

    We are pleased to inform you that your paper:

    MoK: Stigmergy Meets Chemistry to Exploit Social Actions for Coordination Purposes

    has been accepted for presentation at the workshop and inclusion in the AISB proceedings (with ISBN number).

    Below you can find your the reviews of your paper. Camera-ready instructions will follow shortly.

    At least one author needs to register for the event (early registration closes on 5 March 2013). The workshop will take place Wednesday 3 April - Friday 5 April 2013. To provide ample time for discussion, each paper will be given a 15 min presentation slot.

    We look forward to seeing you at the workshop, Tina, Pablo, Harko, Marina


     REVIEW 1 

    PAPER: 11 TITLE: MoK: Stigmergy Meets Chemistry to Exploit Social Actions for Coordination Purposes AUTHORS: Stefano Mariani and Andrea Omicini

    OVERALL EVALUATION: 0 (fair) REVIEWER'S CONFIDENCE: 3 (medium) Relevance to the workshop: 2 (fair) Readability and structure: 2 (fair) How do you judge the chances that the paper will stimulate interesting discussions?: 3 (good) The paper is of interest to the following communities:: 3 (computer and social science)


     REVIEW 

    I frankly admit: I can't exclude that I did not understand important ideas in the paper. But even if so, it would be a major service to the reader if the following question would be answered: You stress that nature inspired metaphors are often helpful. Right. But they are right as starting points - not as end points. After that inspiration, the decisive task - often hard work with a lot of transpiration - is to translate the metaphor into something adequate to the subject that one wants to describe, understand, or control. Your approach does not deliver that translation, and makes it the readers' task to do the translation work. What is the point of such an approach? I have a suspicion, and that is: The missing translation conceals missing substance in the assumptions and the results of the model. And I consider the results in the paper, i.e. the two graphs that show that some exponential growth, as part of the evidence for that suspicion.

    As I said: It may be that I missed something important. But you are well advised to answer my question and to clear my suspicion. I'm fairly sure that I'm not the only reader with this kind of problems.


     REVIEW 2 

    PAPER: 11 TITLE: MoK: Stigmergy Meets Chemistry to Exploit Social Actions for Coordination Purposes AUTHORS: Stefano Mariani and Andrea Omicini

    OVERALL EVALUATION: 1 (good) REVIEWER'S CONFIDENCE: 3 (medium) Relevance to the workshop: 3 (good) Readability and structure: 3 (good) How do you judge the chances that the paper will stimulate interesting discussions?: 3 (good) The paper is of interest to the following communities:: 1 (computer science)


     REVIEW 

    This paper presents the Molecules of Knowledge model that brings together Stigmergy, Cognitive Stigmergy and Behavioural Implicit Communication. They just illustrate shortly how this novel model to Knowledge Intensive Environment. 

    The paper is clear and well written. It brings together different inspiration sources already discussed in the self-org and multi-agent literature. The originality here concerns the integration of these different sources together. 

    The formal model of Molecules of Knowledge is presented in section 3. It would be interesting for helping the user to better figure out this model, to illustrate it with short examples.

    I regret that the related work sections is mainly a presentation of works done by the authors and not a comparison with other works.


     REVIEW 3 

    PAPER: 11 TITLE: MoK: Stigmergy Meets Chemistry to Exploit Social Actions for Coordination Purposes AUTHORS: Stefano Mariani and Andrea Omicini

    OVERALL EVALUATION: -1 (poor) REVIEWER'S CONFIDENCE: 3 (medium) Relevance to the workshop: 2 (fair) Readability and structure: 2 (fair) How do you judge the chances that the paper will stimulate interesting discussions?: 2 (fair) The paper is of interest to the following communities:: 1 (computer science)


     REVIEW 

    The authors propose a novel model for the coordination of Knowledge Intensive Environments (KIE) by adopting a biochemical-inspired point of view on the dynamics of knowledge in artificial or human societies. The proposed model MOK (Molecules of Knowledge model) is linked to the concept of stigmergy, widely studied in biology, and to Castelfranchi's concept of Behavioral Implicit Communication (BIC). I have to say that I had serious difficulties in understanding why the authors decided to adopt such a biochemical metaphor in order to explain coordination and communication in societies of artificial or human agents. The terminology used by the authors (atoms, molecules, enzymes) really confused me. Cognitive agents are not atoms or molecules, they are intelligent systems endowed with the capacities of reasoning, of ascribing meaning to reality, of making decisions on the bases on their beliefs and preferences. I think that the use of such a metaphor should be better justified by the authors. Another point that should be clarified is why the complex conceptual apparatus on which the MOK model is based is needed in order explain dynamics of information in socio-technical systems and, more generally, how information spontaneously diffuse in a society. There exist several theories proposed by social scientists that are able to explain such a phenomenon such as memetics (i.e., the idea that a given piece of information spreads from person to person within a culture in a way analogous to the transmission of genes through natural selection) or signaling theory. Why did the authors not start from one of these well-established theories in order to have a much more solid theoretical and conceptual foundation for their computational model? I think this issue requires further clarifications.

  • Andrea Omicini
    Andrea Omicini, 25/02/2013 19:30

    Paper : 11 Authors : Stefano Mariani and Andrea Omicini Title : MoK: Stigmergy Meets Chemistry to Exploit Social Actions for Coordination Purposes


    Dear Andrea,

    You have already received the comments by the reviewers in a previous email. Please take them carefully into account when preparing your camera-ready paper for the proceedings. The final paper is due on

    Saturday 2 March 2013

    This is a firm deadline for the production of the proceedings. You should submit your paper using your EasyChair author account.

    The maximum length of for papers is 8 A4-sized pages in AISB2011 format (format download: www.aisb.org.uk/convention/aisb11/style.html). Papers that exceed this length or do not follow the format instructions will not included in the proceedings.

    AISB have announced that the proceedings will have an ISBN number. In order for your paper to appear in the proceedings they require a signed copyright statement for each paper. As an author you maintain the copyright but you give AISB the right to publish the work as they see fit. The copyright form is attached to this message. Please return it to us via email (socialpath2013@easychair.org) as soon as possible and before 2 March. Without a signed copyright form your paper will not be part of the proceedings.

    We greatly appreciate your cooperation in these matters. Thank you again for your contribution to SOCIAL.PATH 2013.

    Best wishes, Tina, Pablo, Harko and Marina

Partita IVA: 01131710376 - Copyright © 2008-2021 APICe@DISI Research Group - PRIVACY