Live Social Semantics

Social interactions are one of the key factors to the success of conferences and similar community gatherings. This paper describes a novel application that integrates data from the semantic web, online social networks, and a real-world contact sensing platform. This application was successfully deployed at ESWC09, and actively used by 139 people. Personal profiles of the participants were automatically generated using several Web~2.0 systems and semantic academic data sources, and integrated in real-time with face-to-face contact networks derived from wearable sensors. Integration of all these heterogeneous data layers made it possible to offer various services to conference attendees to enhance their social experience such as visualisation of contact data, and a site to explore and connect with other participants. This paper describes the architecture of the application, the services we provided, and the results we achieved in this deployment

Sociological ontology of the digital public sphere : the case of Web 2.0/3.0

Digital public sphere is immersed in the present conjuncture of accelerated transformation and probable rupture, which certainly will affect the way we exercise our citizenship in contemporary times. This social and political tsunami is partly based on the change of paradigm of Web 2.0 or Social Web to Web 3.0 or Semantic Web. To clarify such a process, this paper discusses some of the key issues and theoretical positions on public space, from seminal Habermas’s perspective to new problematics raised by the networked society. The author suggests the construction of a Sociological Ontology of Social and Semantic Web, based on a Semantic-Logical Sociology and Methodology. These procedures are applied through the analysis and hermeneutics of a Wikipedia page entitled ‘Web 2.0’, where sociological experimental tools are used, as Semantic-Logical fields, trees and networks, central and peripheral concepts, and trichotomies

Sociological ontology of the digital public sphere: the case of Web 2.0/3.0

Digital public sphere is immersed in the present conjuncture of accelerated transformation and probable rupture, which certainly will affect the way we exercise our citizenship in contemporary times. This social and political tsunami is partly based on the change of paradigm of Web 2.0 or Social Web to Web 3.0 or Semantic Web. To clarify such a process, this paper discusses some of the key issues and theoretical positions on public space, from seminal Habermas’s perspective to new problematics raised by the networked society. The author suggests the construction of a Sociological Ontology of Social and Semantic Web, based on a Semantic-Logical Sociology and Methodology. These procedures are applied through the analysis and hermeneutics of a Wikipedia page entitled ‘Web 2.0’, where sociological experimental tools are used, as Semantic-Logical fields, trees and networks, central and peripheral concepts, and trichotomies

Social networks and the semantic web

Akkermans, J.M. [Promotor]Elfring, T. [Promotor]Groenewegen, P. [Copromotor

Interests Diffusion in Social Networks

Understanding cultural phenomena on Social Networks (SNs) and exploiting the implicit knowledge about their members is attracting the interest of different research communities both from the academic and the business side. The community of complexity science is devoting significant efforts to define laws, models, and theories, which, based on acquired knowledge, are able to predict future observations (e.g. success of a product). In the mean time, the semantic web community aims at engineering a new generation of advanced services by defining constructs, models and methods, adding a semantic layer to SNs. In this context, a leapfrog is expected to come from a hybrid approach merging the disciplines above. Along this line, this work focuses on the propagation of individual interests in social networks. The proposed framework consists of the following main components: a method to gather information about the members of the social networks; methods to perform some semantic analysis of the Domain of Interest; a procedure to infer members' interests; and an interests evolution theory to predict how the interests propagate in the network. As a result, one achieves an analytic tool to measure individual features, such as members' susceptibilities and authorities. Although the approach applies to any type of social network, here it is has been tested against the computer science research community. The DBLP (Digital Bibliography and Library Project) database has been elected as test-case since it provides the most comprehensive list of scientific production in this field.Comment: 30 pages 13 figs 4 table

Knowledge society arguments revisited in the semantic technologies era

In the light of high profile governmental and international efforts to realise the knowledge society, I review the arguments made for and against it from a technology standpoint. I focus on advanced knowledge technologies with applications on a large scale and in open- ended environments like the World Wide Web and its ambitious extension, the Semantic Web. I argue for a greater role of social networks in a knowledge society and I explore the recent developments in mechanised trust, knowledge certification, and speculate on their blending with traditional societal institutions. These form the basis of a sketched roadmap for enabling technologies for a knowledge society

When the Social Meets the Semantic: Social Semantic Web or Web 2.5

The social trend is progressively becoming the key feature of current Web understanding (Web 2.0). This trend appears irrepressible as millions of users, directly or indirectly connected through social networks, are able to share and exchange any kind of content, information, feeling or experience. Social interactions radically changed the user approach. Furthermore, the socialization of content around social objects provides new unexplored commercial marketplaces and business opportunities. On the other hand, the progressive evolution of the web towards the Semantic Web (or Web 3.0) provides a formal representation of knowledge based on the meaning of data. When the social meets semantics, the social intelligence can be formed in the context of a semantic environment in which user and community profiles as well as any kind of interaction is semantically represented (Semantic Social Web). This paper first provides a conceptual analysis of the second and third version of the Web model. That discussion is aimed at the definition of a middle concept (Web 2.5) resulting in the convergence and integration of key features from the current and next generation Web. The Semantic Social Web (Web 2.5) has a clear theoretical meaning, understood as the bridge between the overused Web 2.0 and the not yet mature Semantic Web (Web 3.0).Pileggi, SF.; Fernández Llatas, C.; Traver Salcedo, V. (2012). When the Social Meets the Semantic: Social Semantic Web or Web 2.5. Future Internet. 4(3):852-854. doi:10.3390/fi4030852S85285443Chi, E. H. (2008). The Social Web: Research and Opportunities. Computer, 41(9), 88-91. doi:10.1109/mc.2008.401Bulterman, D. C. A. (2001). SMIL 2.0 part 1: overview, concepts, and structure. IEEE Multimedia, 8(4), 82-88. doi:10.1109/93.959106Boll, S. (2007). MultiTube--Where Web 2.0 and Multimedia Could Meet. IEEE Multimedia, 14(1), 9-13. doi:10.1109/mmul.2007.17Fraternali, P., Rossi, G., & Sánchez-Figueroa, F. (2010). Rich Internet Applications. IEEE Internet Computing, 14(3), 9-12. doi:10.1109/mic.2010.76Lassila, O., & Hendler, J. (2007). Embracing «Web 3.0». IEEE Internet Computing, 11(3), 90-93. doi:10.1109/mic.2007.52Dikaiakos, M. D., Katsaros, D., Mehra, P., Pallis, G., & Vakali, A. (2009). Cloud Computing: Distributed Internet Computing for IT and Scientific Research. IEEE Internet Computing, 13(5), 10-13. doi:10.1109/mic.2009.103Mangione-Smith, W. H. (1998). Mobile computing and smart spaces. IEEE Concurrency, 6(4), 5-7. doi:10.1109/4434.736391Greaves, M. (2007). Semantic Web 2.0. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(2), 94-96. doi:10.1109/mis.2007.40Bojars, U., Breslin, J. G., Peristeras, V., Tummarello, G., & Decker, S. (2008). Interlinking the Social Web with Semantics. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 23(3), 29-40. doi:10.1109/mis.2008.50Definition of Web 2.0http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.htmlZhang, D., Guo, B., & Yu, Z. (2011). The Emergence of Social and Community Intelligence. Computer, 44(7), 21-28. doi:10.1109/mc.2011.65Pentlan, A. (2005). Socially aware, computation and communication. Computer, 38(3), 33-40. doi:10.1109/mc.2005.104Staab, S., Domingos, P., Mika, P., Golbeck, J., Li Ding, Finin, T., … Vallacher, R. R. (2005). Social Networks Applied. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 20(1), 80-93. doi:10.1109/mis.2005.16The Semantic Webhttp://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-semantic-webDecker, S., Melnik, S., van Harmelen, F., Fensel, D., Klein, M., Broekstra, J., … Horrocks, I. (2000). The Semantic Web: the roles of XML and RDF. IEEE Internet Computing, 4(5), 63-73. doi:10.1109/4236.877487OWL Web Ontology Language Overviewhttp://www.w3.org/TR/owl-features/Vetere, G., & Lenzerini, M. (2005). Models for semantic interoperability in service-oriented architectures. IBM Systems Journal, 44(4), 887-903. doi:10.1147/sj.444.0887Fensel, D., & Musen, M. A. (2001). The semantic web: a brain for humankind. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 16(2), 24-25. doi:10.1109/mis.2001.920595Shadbolt, N., Berners-Lee, T., & Hall, W. (2006). The Semantic Web Revisited. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(3), 96-101. doi:10.1109/mis.2006.62Dodds, P. S., & Danforth, C. M. (2009). Measuring the Happiness of Large-Scale Written Expression: Songs, Blogs, and Presidents. Journal of Happiness Studies, 11(4), 441-456. doi:10.1007/s10902-009-9150-9Pang, B., & Lee, L. (2008). Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis. Foundations and Trends® in Information Retrieval, 2(1–2), 1-135. doi:10.1561/1500000011Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., & Paltoglou, G. (2011). Sentiment strength detection for the social web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(1), 163-173. doi:10.1002/asi.21662Blogmeterhttp://www.blogmeter.it/Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2010). Social Network Sensors for Early Detection of Contagious Outbreaks. PLoS ONE, 5(9), e12948. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012948Jansen, B. J., Zhang, M., Sobel, K., & Chowdury, A. (2009). Twitter power: Tweets as electronic word of mouth. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(11), 2169-2188. doi:10.1002/asi.21149Bernal, P. A. (2010). Web 2.5: The Symbiotic Web. International Review of Law, Computers & Technology, 24(1), 25-37. doi:10.1080/13600860903570145Mikroyannidis, A. (2007). Toward a Social Semantic Web. Computer, 40(11), 113-115. doi:10.1109/mc.2007.405Jung, J. J. (2012). Computational reputation model based on selecting consensus choices: An empirical study on semantic wiki platform. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(10), 9002-9007. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2012.02.03

Semantics, sensors, and the social web: The live social semantics experiments

The Live Social Semantics is an innovative application that encourages and guides social networking between researchers at conferences and similar events. The application integrates data and technologies from the Semantic Web, online social networks, and a face-to-face contact sensing platform. It helps researchers to find like-minded and influential researchers, to identify and meet people in their community of practice, and to capture and later retrace their real-world networking activities at conferences. The application was successfully deployed at two international conferences, attracting more than 300 users in total. This paper describes this application, and discusses and evaluates the results of its two deployment