Collaborative design : managing task interdependencies and multiple perspectives

This paper focuses on two characteristics of collaborative design with respect to cooperative work: the importance of work interdependencies linked to the nature of design problems; and the fundamental function of design cooperative work arrangement which is the confrontation and combination of perspectives. These two intrinsic characteristics of the design work stress specific cooperative processes: coordination processes in order to manage task interdependencies, establishment of common ground and negotiation mechanisms in order to manage the integration of multiple perspectives in design

Unlocking medical leadership’s potential:a multilevel virtuous circle?

Background and aim: Medical leadership (ML) has been introduced in many countries, promising to support healthcare services improvement and help further system reform through effective leadership behaviours. Despite some evidence of its success, such lofty promises remain unfulfilled. Method: Couched in extant international literature, this paper provides a conceptual framework to analyse ML's potential in the context of healthcare's complex, multifaceted setting. Results: We identify four interrelated levels of analysis, or domains, that influence ML's potential to transform healthcare delivery. These are the healthcare ecosystem domain, the professional domain, the organisational domain and the individual doctor domain. We discuss the tensions between the various actors working in and across these domains and argue that greater multilevel and multistakeholder collaborative working in healthcare is necessary to reprofessionalise and transform healthcare ecosystems

Formalisation and evaluation of focus theories for requirements elicitation dialogues in natural language

Requirements engineering is an important part of software engineering. It consists in defining the needs of users when building a new system. These needs may be functional, i.e., what service should the system be able to provide, as well as non-functional, i.e., under which constraints should the system operate. Errors in requirements may have disastrous effects in the rest of the software engineering process (Brooks 1995, p.199), since they would lead to the construction of a system of little interest to its users or would require expensive modifications to correct. Because requirements documents may be very large, errors are usually hard to detect manually. Computer support is therefore often beneficial for their analysis. This is made easier if requirements are expressed formally. However, this support must also be adapted to and be usable by people who are expressing their requirements. These people are usually not computer specialists and are not accustomed to use formal languages. It is therefore necessary to help them express their requirements. Numerous approaches, have been suggested as aids to the acquisition of requirements (Reubenstein 1990). Much less attention has been paid to the control of the dialogue taking place between the users and the system whilst using such frameworks (Bubenko et al. 1994). Frameworks for requirements acquisition are not normally accompanied by theories of the types of dialogue which they support. Our ability to develop sophisticated formal frameworks to analyse requirements makes this deficiency more acutely felt, since increases in formality are often accompanied by greater difficulty in understanding and using the frameworks (Robertson et al. 1989).Users write their requirements in more or less natural language. This is then translated into a formal language that can be interpreted by the elicitation module. This module works on the requirements and provide feedback. The translation process is then applied to convert feedback into more or less natural language. Different systems put different emphasis on the parts of that general architecture. Some are very good at natural language interpretation while others put more emphasis on analysing the requirements and providing feedback.Natural language approaches to requirements elicitation, put an emphasis on natural language interpretation (see section 1.2.1). In these approaches, users write their specifica¬ tion in a subset of natural language. The system then translates it into a formal notation. The main benefit provided by these approaches is the improvement in the ease of use of the system: natural language is the main means of communication for human beings and does not need to be learned. However, most of these approaches do not provide a dialogue well suited for the requirements elicitation process. Because they translate the natural lan¬ guage specification into a formal notation but do not provide guidance on how to write the specification in the first place, users are left in charge of writing correct requirements. If a mistake is made while writing the specification, it will simply be translated into the formal notation.In order to actively help users in the process of writing the requirements, the elicit¬ ation system must interact with them. The emphasis, here, is no longer on translating requirements, but on actively extracting them through a dialogue with users. This is useful, since the requirements elicitation process is complex, and offering guidance is a big help for users. Unfortunately, most of the approaches providing guidance expose their formal underlying frameworks directly to users (see section 1.2.2). In order to benefit from the guidance provided, users have to learn the idiosyncrasies of the system they use. The task of providing guidance is complicated by the fact that there are numerous ways of carrying out the requirements elicitation. Very little research has been done on how to organise best the elicitation process to provide effective guidance. An arbitrary choice could be made, but forcing users to adopt a predefined method is usually not possible as it would make the elicitation process very difficult to follow and understand. The system must therefore be able to adapt itself to various elicitation methods. On the other hand, it is necessary for the system to make choices in order to provide active guidance. A "least-commitment" strategy, such as asking users at every choice point what to do next, is not a useful approach (Ferguson et al. 1996).One way of offering guidance without restricting users too much is by communicating with them in natural language, and by using natural language constraints to inform the choices made by the system to select a guidance strategy. These constraints ensure that the system adopts a strategy that will guide users in a natural and understandable manner, by taking into account the current state of the dialogue. In other words, the system takes into account the current state of the specification to help users complete it, but the current state of the dialogue is the principal factor constraining what will be spoken about next. Using such an approach reduces some of the problems discussed above. The specification does not need to be immediately correct as it will be checked and reworked by the system. The formal framework is hidden from users but is still there to ensure the correctness of the specifications. Guidance is continuously offered through dialogue, which is influenced by but does not directly follow the steps of construction of the specification.The natural language constraints we use in this thesis are theories of dialogue coherence, called "focus" theories. They define what can be spoken about next in a dialogue based on what has already been discussed and the subject under discussion. The theories take into account what participants in a dialogue pay attention to and try to ensure that the rest of the dialogue is related to it. The systems tries to help its users define how a research group WWW site should look like. The way the dialogue evolves from discussing the research group, to discussing the site and its associated home page, to discussing the set of publication can quite easily be followed. The use of pronouns helps in making the text fell natural. It would have been difficult to achieve the same result without using focus rules.Other techniques for organising dialogues, such as those based on the intentions under¬ lying the dialogue (Cohen et al. 1990), would require the dialogue manager to know what the elicitation system is trying to achieve and what its plan is. For some elicitation systems, this knowledge may not be available. Similarly, techniques based on the content of the communications exchanged and how they relate, e.g., based on RST (Mann and Thompson 1987), usually require a lot of domain knowledge. They are therefore time-consumming to code. Focus theories require less information from the elicitation module while enabling the dialogue manager to structure the dialogue. However, in some cases, focus theories are not sufficient to organise a dialogue. We use a theory based on speech act (see section 3.4.1) and some ideas from Grice's work on conversation (see section 5.2.1) to deal with these cases. More generally, although we tried to minimise the impact of other theories to study in detail focus theories, it would be interesting to know whether and how we can integrate them with the work presented in this thesis. In particular, the notion of dialog act and its application to dialog grammar could be of interest. General frameworks developped to study various aspects of dialogue, including dialog acts and focus, have started to appear but work is still at an early stage (C-Star Consortium 1998; Allen and Core 1997).Organising a dialogue based on attention requires a lot of domain knowledge in order to know how things mentioned in the dialogue relate to each other. Therefore, the amount of knowledge engineering needed to build natural language applications is also an important issue. We have tried to limit the engineering difficulties by clearly separating the domain knowledge needed by our dialogue manager from its management capabilities, and by provid¬ ing a way of re-using the existing domain knowledge as far as possible. This is done by using rules which enable us to re-use part of the domain knowledge already used by the elicitation module.The contribution of this thesis is therefore the formalisation and evaluation of focus theories for requirements elicitation dialogues in natural language. The main questions we deal with are the following: • Which focus theories should we use? • What are the relations between the constraints imposed by the focus theories and the constraints inherent to the requirements elicitation process? • Does this approach improve the perceived quality of the dialogue between the elicita¬ tion tool and its users?A prototype system has been developed. This system mainly operates in the WWW site design domain. It has also been applied in other domains as an initial demonstration of the range of problems that can be tackled by our approach

Centering, Anaphora Resolution, and Discourse Structure

Centering was formulated as a model of the relationship between attentional state, the form of referring expressions, and the coherence of an utterance within a discourse segment (Grosz, Joshi and Weinstein, 1986; Grosz, Joshi and Weinstein, 1995). In this chapter, I argue that the restriction of centering to operating within a discourse segment should be abandoned in order to integrate centering with a model of global discourse structure. The within-segment restriction causes three problems. The first problem is that centers are often continued over discourse segment boundaries with pronominal referring expressions whose form is identical to those that occur within a discourse segment. The second problem is that recent work has shown that listeners perceive segment boundaries at various levels of granularity. If centering models a universal processing phenomenon, it is implausible that each listener is using a different centering algorithm.The third issue is that even for utterances within a discourse segment, there are strong contrasts between utterances whose adjacent utterance within a segment is hierarchically recent and those whose adjacent utterance within a segment is linearly recent. This chapter argues that these problems can be eliminated by replacing Grosz and Sidner's stack model of attentional state with an alternate model, the cache model. I show how the cache model is easily integrated with the centering algorithm, and provide several types of data from naturally occurring discourses that support the proposed integrated model. Future work should provide additional support for these claims with an examination of a larger corpus of naturally occurring discourses.Comment: 35 pages, uses elsart12, lingmacros, named, psfi

Models of Interaction as a Grounding for Peer to Peer Knowledge Sharing

Most current attempts to achieve reliable knowledge sharing on a large scale have relied on pre-engineering of content and supply services. This, like traditional knowledge engineering, does not by itself scale to large, open, peer to peer systems because the cost of being precise about the absolute semantics of services and their knowledge rises rapidly as more services participate. We describe how to break out of this deadlock by focusing on semantics related to interaction and using this to avoid dependency on a priori semantic agreement; instead making semantic commitments incrementally at run time. Our method is based on interaction models that are mobile in the sense that they may be transferred to other components, this being a mechanism for service composition and for coalition formation. By shifting the emphasis to interaction (the details of which may be hidden from users) we can obtain knowledge sharing of sufficient quality for sustainable communities of practice without the barrier of complex meta-data provision prior to community formation

Conformity, deformity and reformity

In any given field of artistic practice, practitioners position themselves—or find themselves positioned—according to interests and allegiances with specific movements, genres, and traditions. Selecting particular frameworks through which to approach the development of new ideas, patterns and expressions, balance is invariably maintained between the desire to contribute towards and connect with a particular set of domain conventions, whilst at the same time developing distinction and recognition as a creative individual. Creativity through the constraints of artistic domain, discipline and style provides a basis for consideration of notions of originality in the context of activity primarily associated with reconfiguration, manipulation and reorganisation of existing elements and ideas. Drawing from postmodern and post-structuralist perspectives in the analysis of modern hybrid art forms and the emergence of virtual creative environments, the transition from traditional artistic practice and notions of craft and creation, to creative spaces in which elements are manipulated, mutated, combined and distorted with often frivolous or subversive intent are considered. This paper presents an educational and musically focused perspective of the relationship between the individual and domain-based creative practice. Drawing primarily from musical and audio-visual examples with particular interest in creative disruption of pre-existing elements, creative strategies of appropriation and recycling are explored in the context of music composition and production. Conclusions focus on the interpretation of creativity as essentially a process of recombination and manipulation and highlight how the relationship between artist and field of practice creates unique creative spaces through which new ideas emerge