>Hi Pat,
>
>Agree with your point. But can I ask for some more detail.
>
>The reason in I have great difficulty in getting others to recognise this
>point (for some my personal authority is insufficient :-) ).
>
>I usually quote Searle, who has quite a few comments about law makers in
>this vein in the construction of social reality. Also Margaret Gilbert has
>comments in her on social facts.
>
>I shall now add Pat Hayes and IHMC to the list of authorities :-). (01)
Well, better instead add Robert Hoffman, who is
our resident expert in this area and uses Cmaps
all the time. He also has used many other
techniques, and has some actual empirical figures
of concepts extracted per man-hour of analysis
time which seem to show quite consistently that
the collaborative Cmap construction technique
(there is a whole methodology to it) gets close
to an order-of-magnitude improvement, at least in
the initial stages. Theyve applied it to (among
others) nuclear power plant maintenance, weather
forecasting, traditional Siamese folk weaving,
naval training and various secret topics that we
aren't allowed to know about. (02)
>What would be nice is a few (authoritative) papers to point to as well. Do
>you know of any? Apologies if these are already well known to others. (03)
I can get you citations, but not until next week
when he gets back from travelling. (04)
>As an aside, I have similar experiences to your KE mavens with concept maps
>(Novak's I presume) (05)
Yes, though we have a number of bells and
whistles added. We retain Joe as a consultant on
the project. (06)
I have many anecdotes. My favorite, which I
myself witnessed, was a visit here from two
senior execs from Proctor & Gamble (who make more
money from information than they do from soap
powder, and themselves use Cmaps extensively) to
try out the Cmap collaboration tool. They weren't
very convinced that they needed such an elaborate
device, since they all knew what one another were
talking about. We set them down at two computers
at opposite ends of the lab and they decided to
build a 'toy' Cmap about some management topic
they were currently thinking about. By the time
they got to the fourth concept node they were
arguing heatedly about what the words meant. I
had to go outside so I could laugh. (07)
Pat (08)
>in trying to get things clear.
>
>Regards,
>Chris Partridge
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pat Hayes
>Sent: 23 February 2007 15:40
>To: matthew.west@xxxxxxxxx
>Cc: ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] vague wish lists VS formal specifications
>
>
>...
>> > [Deborah McPherson]
>> > With a checklist to follow, untrained customers will be better
>> > prepared and able to state what their needs are and organize their
>>> resources to provide ontology engineers, programmers, and formal
>>> specification writers with what THEY need to get the data to flow in
>>> potentially customized, atypical manners.
>>
>>MW: I disagree. My experience is that you need to take what the
>>customer says they need, and perform analysis to determine what they
>>really need.
>
>A quick note: our experience here (at IHMC) on expert knowledge
>extraction bears this out, in spades. There is an entire field
>devoted to techniques for discovering what customers/experts actually
>know and want, as opposed to what they think they know and want. (In
>case this idea offends, bear in mind that it applies to the people
>doing the analysis just as much as to everyone else.)
>
>For the record, our KE mavens (I am not one of them) tell me that one
>of the most efficient such analysis techniques involves collaborative
>construction of a concept map, which is one reason we have developed
>so much software around this apparently trivial notion.
>
>Pat Hayes
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home
>40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
>Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
>FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell
>phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
>Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
>Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
>Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
>To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> (09)
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------
IHMC (850)434 8903 or (650)494 3973 home
40 South Alcaniz St. (850)202 4416 office
Pensacola (850)202 4440 fax
FL 32502 (850)291 0667 cell
phayesAT-SIGNihmc.us http://www.ihmc.us/users/phayes (010)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (011)
|