9 research outputs found
Contextual healing: Privacy through interpretation management
Contextual privacy is an essential concept in social software communication. Managing privacy of data disclosed in social software dependence strongly on the context the data is disclosed in. The sheer amount of posts and audiences may lead to context ambiguity. Ambiguity can affect contextual privacy management and effective communication. Current contextual privacy management approaches can be either too complex to use, or too simple to offer fine-grained control. In many cases, it is challenging to strike a balance between effective control and ease-of-use. In this article, we analyse contextual privacy by in relation to context and communication. We examine a relevant contextual privacy management framework based on the maintenance of the interpretation of data. We propose an architecture based on the utilisation of intelligent mechanisms. We conceptually analyse the usability aspect of the proposed architecture. We conclude by arguing how our conceptual framework can enhance communication and privacy in private and public spaces
Geo-Ontology Tools â the missing link
Numerous authors have presented ontology building tools that have all been developed as part of academic projects and that are usually adaptations of more generic tools for geo-spatial applications. While we trust that these tools do their job for the special purpose they have been built, the GIScience user community is still a long way away from off-the-shelf ontology builders that can be used by GIS project managers. In this article, we present a comparative study of ontology building tools described in some twenty peer-reviewed GIScience journal articles. We analyze them from the perspective of two application domains, crime analysis and transportation/land use. For the latter, we developed a database schema, which is substantially different from the three main templates commonly used. The crime analysis application uses a rule base for an agent-based model that had no precursor. In both cases, the currently available set of tools cannot replace manual coding of ontologies for use with ESRI-based application software. Based on these experiences, we outline a requirements list of what the tools described in the first part of the article are missing to make them practical from an applications perspective. The result is an R&D agenda for this important aspect of GIScience
Using process mining to learn from process changes in evolutionary systems
Abstract. Traditional information systems struggle with the requirement to provide flexibility and process support while still enforcing some degree of control. Accordingly, adaptive process management systems (PMSs) have emerged that provide some flexibility by enabling dynamic process changes during runtime. Based on the assumption that these process changes are recorded explicitly, we present two techniques for mining change logs in adaptive PMSs; i.e., we do not only analyze the execution logs of the operational processes, but also consider the adaptations made at the process instance level. The change processes discovered through process mining provide an aggregated overview of all changes that happened so far. This, in turn, can serve as basis for integrating the extrinsic drivers of process change (i.e., the stimuli for flexibility) with existing process adaptation approaches (i.e., the intrinsic change mechanisms). Using process mining as an analysis tool we show in this paper how better support can be provided for truly flexible processes by understanding when and why process changes become necessary
Contextualization as an Independent Abstraction Mechanism for Conceptual Modeling
The notion of context appears in computer science, as well as in several other disciplines, in various forms. In this paper, we present a general framework for representing the notion of context in information modeling. First, we define a context as a set of objects, within which each object has a set of names and possibly a reference: the reference of the object is another context which "hides" detailed information about the object. Then, we introduce the possibility of structuring the contents of a context through the traditional abstraction mechanisms, i.e. classification, generalization, and attribution. We show that, depending on the application, our notion of context can be used as an independent abstraction mechanism, either in an alternative or a complementary capacity with respect to the traditional abstraction mechanisms. We also study the interactions between contextualization and the traditional abstraction mechanisms, as well as the constraints that govern such interactions. Finally, we present a theory for contextualized information bases. The theory includes a set of validity constraints, a model theory, as well as a set of sound and complete inference rules. We show that our core theory can be easily extended to support embedding of particular information models in our contextualization framework
A METHODOLOGY FOR DEVELOPMENT OF DOMAIN SPECIFIC SIMULATION APPLICATIONS AND ENVIRONMENTS
In the modeling and simulation (M&S) arena, simulation developers have been exploring the concepts that facilitate modeling real world elements using appropriate simulation artifacts within the context of the domain of the application. However, there are some critical issues that distort their effectiveness and efficiency. The first issue is the quantity and quality of assumptions and constraints made during the M&S development, concerning the completeness of simulation models to represent reality. The second issue is the levels of model composability and simulation interoperability, affecting the possibility of data exchange and reusability. The third issue is development of an effective simulation-based environment such that the implementation of the concepts effectively implemented. Thus, this research study aims to develop a methodology that addresses these issues to improve the development of simulation models and the creation of simulation modeling environments particular to specific domains. Conceptual simulation modeling (CSM), model transformation, and domain specific simulation environment (DSSE) create the foundations for this methodology to bridge the gap between reality and simulation
A capability-based context modelling method to enhance digital service flexibility
The thesis argues that the enterprises need to understand their application context to be able to offer ïŹexible digital services. Furthermore, after analysing the state of research in Services Science, it concludes that different roles with varying backgrounds participate to design and implementation of digital services, which adds the need for alignment between those as a further challenge for ïŹexibility. To fulïŹl this, the thesis designs a context modelling method and evaluates it by means of Design Science Research (DSR).Digitalisierung in der Dienstleistungökonomie erfordert, die Auswirkungen von verĂ€nderten Anwendungskontexten an die zu erbringenden Services genau zu verstehen. Es wird nach der Analyse des Standes der Technik in Services Science festgestellt, dass unterschiedliche Rollen in der Gestaltung und Umsetzung von Digital Services beteiligt sind, was die Notwendigkeit der Abstimmung zwischen diesen Rollen als eine wichtige Herausforderung an die FlexibilitĂ€t stellt. Um ein solches Alignment zu erreichen, entwickelt dieser Beitrag eine Kontextmodellierungsmethode und evaluiert diese mittels DSR
IngĂ©nierie et Architecture dâEntreprise et des SystĂšmes dâInformation - Concepts, Fondements et MĂ©thodes
L'ingĂ©nierie des systĂšmes d'information s'est longtemps cantonnĂ©e Ă la modĂ©lisation du produit (objet) qu'est le systĂšme dâinformation sans se prĂ©occuper des processus d'usage de ce systĂšme. Dans un environnement de plus en plus Ă©volutif, la modĂ©lisation du fonctionnement du systĂšme dâinformation au sein de l'entreprise me semble primordiale. Pendant les deux derniĂšres dĂ©cennies, les pratiques de management, dâingĂ©nierie et dâopĂ©ration ont subi des mutations profondes et multiformes. Nous devons tenir compte de ces mutations dans les recherches en ingĂ©nierie des systĂšmes dâinformation afin de produire des formalismes et des dĂ©marches mĂ©thodologiques qui sauront anticiper et satisfaire les nouveaux besoins, regroupĂ©s dans ce document sous quatre thĂšmes:1) Le systĂšme dâinformation est le lieu mĂȘme oĂč sâĂ©labore la coordination des actes et des informations sans laquelle une entreprise (et toute organisation), dans la diversitĂ© des mĂ©tiers et des compĂ©tences quâelle met en Ćuvre, ne peut exister que dans la mĂ©diocritĂ©. La comprĂ©hension des exigences de coopĂ©ration dans toutes ses dimensions (communication, coordination, collaboration) et le support que lâinformatique peut et doit y apporter deviennent donc un sujet digne dâintĂ©rĂȘt pour les recherches en systĂšme dâinformation.2) Le paradigme de management des processus dâentreprise (BPM) est en forte opposition avec le dĂ©veloppement traditionnel des systĂšmes dâinformation qui, pendant plusieurs dĂ©cennies, a cristallisĂ© la division verticale des activitĂ©s des organisations et favorisĂ© ainsi la construction dâĂźlots dâinformation et dâapplications. Cependant, les approches traditionnelles de modĂ©lisation de processus ne sont pas Ă la hauteur des besoins dâingĂ©nierie des processus dans ce contexte en constant changement, que ce dernier soit de nature contextuelle ou permanente. Nous avons donc besoin de formalismes (i) qui permettent non seulement de reprĂ©senter les processus dâentreprise et leurs liens avec les composants logiciels du systĂšme existant ou Ă venir mais (ii) qui ont aussi lâaptitude Ă reprĂ©senter la nature variable et/ou Ă©volutive (donc parfois Ă©minemment dĂ©cisionnelle) de ces processus.3) Les systĂšmes dâinformation continuent aujourdâhui de supporter les besoins classiques tels que lâautomatisation et la coordination de la chaĂźne de production, lâamĂ©lioration de la qualitĂ© des produits et/ou services offerts. Cependant un nouveau rĂŽle leur est attribuĂ©. Il sâagit du potentiel offert par les systĂšmes dâinformation pour adopter un rĂŽle de support au service de la stratĂ©gie de lâentreprise. Les technologies de lâinformation, de la communication et de la connaissance se sont ainsi positionnĂ©es comme une ressource stratĂ©gique, support de la transformation organisationnelle voire comme levier du changement. Les modĂšles dâentreprise peuvent reprĂ©senter lâĂ©tat actuel de lâorganisation afin de comprendre, de disposer dâune reprĂ©sentation partagĂ©e, de mesurer les performances, et Ă©ventuellement dâidentifier les dysfonctionnements. Ils permettent aussi de reprĂ©senter un Ă©tat futur souhaitĂ© afin de dĂ©finir une cible vers laquelle avancer par la mise en Ćuvre des projets. Lâentreprise Ă©tant en mouvement perpĂ©tuel, son Ă©volution fait partie de ses multiples dimensions. Nous avons donc besoin de reprĂ©senter, a minima, un Ă©tat futur et le chemin de transformation Ă construire pour avancer vers cette cible. Cependant planifier/imaginer/se projeter vers une cible unique et, en supposant que lâon y arrive, croire quâil puisse exister un seul chemin pour lâatteindre semble irrĂ©aliste. Nous devons donc proposer des formalismes qui permettront de spĂ©cifier des scenarii Ă la fois pour des cibles Ă atteindre et pour des chemins Ă parcourir. Nous devons aussi dĂ©velopper des dĂ©marches mĂ©thodologiques pour guider de maniĂšre systĂ©matique la construction de ces modĂšles dâentreprise et la rationalitĂ© sous-jacente.4) En moins de cinquante ans, le propos du systĂšme dâinformation a Ă©voluĂ© et sâest complexifiĂ©. Aujourdâhui, le systĂšme dâinformation doit supporter non seulement les fonctions de support de maniĂšre isolĂ©e et en silos (1970-1990), et les activitĂ©s appartenant Ă la chaĂźne de valeur [Porter, 1985] de lâentreprise (1980-2000) mais aussi les activitĂ©s de contrĂŽle, de pilotage, de planification stratĂ©gique ainsi que la cohĂ©rence et lâharmonie de lâensemble des processus liĂ©s aux activitĂ©s mĂ©tier (2000-201x), en un mot les activitĂ©s de management stratĂ©gique et de gouvernance dâentreprise. La gouvernance d'entreprise est l'ensemble des processus, rĂ©glementations, lois et institutions influant la maniĂšre dont l'entreprise est dirigĂ©e, administrĂ©e et contrĂŽlĂ©e. Ces processus qui produisent des âdĂ©cisionsâ en guise de âproduitâ ont autant besoin dâĂȘtre instrumentalisĂ©s par les systĂšmes dâinformation que les processus de nature plus opĂ©rationnels de lâentreprise. De mĂȘme, ces processus stratĂ©giques (dits aussi âde dĂ©veloppementâ) nĂ©cessitent dâavoir recours Ă des formalismes de reprĂ©sentation qui sont trĂšs loin, en pouvoir dâexpression, des notations largement adoptĂ©es ces derniĂšres annĂ©es pour la reprĂ©sentation des processus dâentreprise.Ainsi, il semble peu judicieux de vouloir (ou penser pouvoir) isoler, pendant sa construction, lâobjet âsystĂšme dâinformationâ de son environnement dâexĂ©cution. Si le sens donnĂ© Ă lâinformation dĂ©pend de la personne qui la reçoit, ce sens ne peut ĂȘtre entiĂšrement capturĂ© dans le systĂšme technique. Il sera plutĂŽt apprĂ©hendĂ© comme une composante essentielle dâun systĂšme socio-technique incluant les usagers du systĂšme dâinformation technologisĂ©, autrement dit, les acteurs agissant de lâentreprise. De mon point de vue, ce systĂšme socio-technique qui mĂ©rite lâintĂ©rĂȘt scientifique de notre discipline est lâentreprise. Les recherches que jâai rĂ©alisĂ©es, animĂ©es ou supervisĂ©es , et qui sont structurĂ©es en quatre thĂšmes dans ce document, visent Ă rĂ©soudre les problĂšmes liĂ©s aux contextes de l'usage (l'entreprise et son environnement) des systĂšmes dâinformation. Le point discriminant de ma recherche est l'intĂ©rĂȘt que je porte Ă la capacitĂ© de reprĂ©sentation :(i) de l'Ă©volutivitĂ© et de la flexibilitĂ© des processus d'entreprise en particulier de ceux supportĂ©s par un systĂšme logiciel, dâun point de vue microscopique (modĂšle dâun processus) et macroscopique (reprĂ©sentation et configuration dâun rĂ©seau de processus) : thĂšme 2(ii) du systĂšme dâentreprise dans toutes ses dimensions (stratĂ©gie, organisation des processus, systĂšme dâinformation et changement) : thĂšme 3Pour composer avec ces motivations, il fallait :(iii) sâintĂ©resser Ă la nature mĂȘme du travail coopĂ©ratif et Ă lâintentionnalitĂ© des acteurs agissant afin dâidentifier et/ou proposer des formalismes appropriĂ©s pour les dĂ©crire et les comprendre : thĂšme 1(iv) se questionner aussi sur les processus de management dont le rĂŽle est de surveiller, mesurer, piloter lâentreprise afin de leur apporter le soutien quâils mĂ©ritent du systĂšme dâinformation : thĂšme