An empirical perspective on representing time

A. Scheuermann, E. Motta, P. Mulholland, Aldo Gangemi, V. Presutti
{"title":"An empirical perspective on representing time","authors":"A. Scheuermann, E. Motta, P. Mulholland, Aldo Gangemi, V. Presutti","doi":"10.1145/2479832.2479854","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most Knowledge Representation (KR) research follows a topdown approach: i) formalisms are designed on the basis of modelling needs and computational considerations, and ii) tools and applications based on these formalisms are realized and tested on application domains. As a result, there has traditionally been little attention in the KR research community to user issues, in particular to the usability of alternative modelling solutions. When statements about the intuitiveness of different solutions are found in the literature, these tend to reflect an author's epistemological standpoint, rather than any concrete user experience. In this paper we take a bottom-up, user-centric perspective and we report on an empirical study where subjects have been asked to represent temporal information and have been provided with alternative design patterns to do so. The study shows that, depending on their experience and level of expertise in KR, users tend to select different patterns for the given modelling problems. In particular, experts appear to choose on the basis of representation power, while naïve users appear to select on the basis of surface features and perceived user-friendliness. Interestingly, while some patterns are indeed perceived to be more intuitive than others, these considerations seem to apply primarily to less experienced users. Indeed, our findings appear to indicate that experts consider issues of 'intuitiveness' as secondary and, in contrast with naïve users, may be happy to apply patterns, which can be regarded as counter-intuitive, if they provide the right tool for the job.","PeriodicalId":388497,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the seventh international conference on Knowledge capture","volume":"10 5","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the seventh international conference on Knowledge capture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2479832.2479854","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

Abstract

Most Knowledge Representation (KR) research follows a topdown approach: i) formalisms are designed on the basis of modelling needs and computational considerations, and ii) tools and applications based on these formalisms are realized and tested on application domains. As a result, there has traditionally been little attention in the KR research community to user issues, in particular to the usability of alternative modelling solutions. When statements about the intuitiveness of different solutions are found in the literature, these tend to reflect an author's epistemological standpoint, rather than any concrete user experience. In this paper we take a bottom-up, user-centric perspective and we report on an empirical study where subjects have been asked to represent temporal information and have been provided with alternative design patterns to do so. The study shows that, depending on their experience and level of expertise in KR, users tend to select different patterns for the given modelling problems. In particular, experts appear to choose on the basis of representation power, while naïve users appear to select on the basis of surface features and perceived user-friendliness. Interestingly, while some patterns are indeed perceived to be more intuitive than others, these considerations seem to apply primarily to less experienced users. Indeed, our findings appear to indicate that experts consider issues of 'intuitiveness' as secondary and, in contrast with naïve users, may be happy to apply patterns, which can be regarded as counter-intuitive, if they provide the right tool for the job.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
时间表征的经验主义观点
大多数知识表示(KR)研究遵循自顶向下的方法:i)基于建模需求和计算考虑设计形式化,ii)基于这些形式化的工具和应用程序在应用领域中实现和测试。因此,传统上KR研究社区很少关注用户问题,特别是替代建模解决方案的可用性。当在文献中发现关于不同解决方案的直观性的陈述时,这些往往反映了作者的认识论立场,而不是任何具体的用户体验。在本文中,我们采用自下而上、以用户为中心的视角,并报告了一项实证研究,该研究要求受试者表示时间信息,并为其提供了替代设计模式。研究表明,根据他们在KR方面的经验和专业水平,用户倾向于为给定的建模问题选择不同的模式。特别是,专家似乎根据代表性进行选择,而naïve用户似乎根据表面特征和感知到的用户友好性进行选择。有趣的是,虽然有些模式确实被认为比其他模式更直观,但这些考虑似乎主要适用于经验不足的用户。事实上,我们的研究结果似乎表明,专家认为“直觉”问题是次要的,与naïve用户相反,如果他们为工作提供了正确的工具,他们可能会很乐意应用模式,这可能被视为反直觉。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Unsupervised wrapper induction using linked data Toward semantic interoperability with linked foundationalontologies in ROMULUS Concept adjustment for description logics Proceedings of the seventh international conference on Knowledge capture An empirical perspective on representing time
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1