The Evolution of Wikipedia's Norm Network

Social norms have traditionally been difficult to quantify. In any particular society, their sheer number and complex interdependencies often limit a system-level analysis. One exception is that of the network of norms that sustain the online Wikipedia community. We study the fifteen-year evolution of this network using the interconnected set of pages that establish, describe, and interpret the community's norms. Despite Wikipedia's reputation for \textit{ad hoc} governance, we find that its normative evolution is highly conservative. The earliest users create norms that both dominate the network and persist over time. These core norms govern both content and interpersonal interactions using abstract principles such as neutrality, verifiability, and assume good faith. As the network grows, norm neighborhoods decouple topologically from each other, while increasing in semantic coherence. Taken together, these results suggest that the evolution of Wikipedia's norm network is akin to bureaucratic systems that predate the information age.Comment: 22 pages, 9 figures. Matches published version. Data available at http://bit.ly/wiki_nor

GIS Applications for Coal Mine Subsidence in the State of Colorado

The state of Colorado has an extensive history of subsurface coal mining. Due to the widespread extraction of coal, numerous subsidence events have occurred, causing both costly and potentially dangerous conditions. The two most common types of underground coal mines in Colorado are slope and shaft mines, which are prone to roof collapse that can propagate to the surface in the form of sinkholes and troughs. Sinkholes and troughs can occur over prolonged periods of time or as instantaneous events, which may leave landowners little reaction time and expensive repairs. As of January 2010, no spatial database existed that covered all subsidence events for the state of Colorado, which caused difficulties for developers, government agencies, and the general public when attempting to identify subsidence hazards. The Colorado Geologic Survey recognized the necessity of locating past subsidence events and has funded a project that utilizes a Geographic Information System (GIS), on an ESRI geodatabase platform, to identify and visualize such events. Subsidence events were collected from several primary sources including the Mine Subsidence Information Center (MSIC) at the Colorado Geological Survey (CGS), the Office of Surface Mining (OSM), the Division of Reclamation Mining and Safety (DRMS), and various historic article and newspaper clippings. Several hundred subsidence events were then organized and catalogued into a file geodatabase using automated and manual entry from spreadsheets, reports, and maps. This file geodatabase uses domains, both coded and range, to simplify and standardize common data input, which will allow an efficient flow of information into the geodatabase for future subsidence events. Hyperlinks were attached to subsidence events within the file geodatabase so that users can dynamically link to scanned documents and images about a specific subsidence event. Several GIS mapping interfaces were constructed, for data input, query, and analysis by the CGS, and for outside users to navigate the map and export reports and images of subsidence events in a user friendly format. The purpose of this project was to use proper documentation of past subsidence events to identify future subsidence hazards. The subsidence events GIS will allow users the ability to rapidly query and analyze historic subsidence data, view images of subsidence events, and export documents and reports of subsidence events, thereby optimizing the safe, efficient and economic planning of building developments

All the Wild Possibilities: Technology that Attacks Barriers to Access to Justice

Predicting how technology will affect the future of the legal profession is difficult and unreliable work. I have made my share of such predictions in the past thirty years, including foretelling the death of the paper casebook in law schools and vast improvements in law practice that would be triggered by computers and document assembly software. Neither of these two prophesies has yet been fulfilled. Yet a real success story has emerged based in part on my persistent optimism that technology can improve the delivery of legal services. A2J Author, a modest software tool that allows lawyers to build guided Internet interviews for prospective clients, has been adopted across the United States and in several foreign countries as an interface for public access to legal processes. This Article describes the origin of A2J Author as a collaboration by courts, legal aid agencies, and funding sources. The Article explores the combination of factors that produced this technology, which successfully attacks barriers to access to justice. Finally, the Article speculates on whether A2J Author can begin to transform the delivery of legal aid and government services to low income people

All the Wild Possibilities: Technology that Attacks Barriers to Access to Justice

Predicting how technology will affect the future of the legal profession is difficult and unreliable work. I have made my share of such predictions in the past thirty years, including foretelling the death of the paper casebook in law schools and vast improvements in law practice that would be triggered by computers and document assembly software. Neither of these two prophesies has yet been fulfilled. Yet a real success story has emerged based in part on my persistent optimism that technology can improve the delivery of legal services. A2J Author, a modest software tool that allows lawyers to build guided Internet interviews for prospective clients, has been adopted across the United States and in several foreign countries as an interface for public access to legal processes. This Article describes the origin of A2J Author as a collaboration by courts, legal aid agencies, and funding sources. The Article explores the combination of factors that produced this technology, which successfully attacks barriers to access to justice. Finally, the Article speculates on whether A2J Author can begin to transform the delivery of legal aid and government services to low income people

A Fourth Circuit Photograph

The Commission on Structural Alternatives for the Federal Courts of Appeals issued a report and proposals after carefully evaluating the appellate system for a year, while the data have minimally changed since the report\u27s issuance. The Commission\u27s principal focus was the Ninth Circuit, as Congress had instructed, yet the Commission assembled much useful information on each circuit court of appeals and found that all operate efficaciously. Because how the Fourth Circuit addresses a large docket is critical to appellate justice, the Commission\u27s analysis of the tribunal and the court itself merit scrutiny, which this Article undertakes. Part I of this Article examines the Commission\u27s background and its study. Part II assesses the Commission\u27s review in an effort to increase appreciation of the modern Fourth Circuit. The Commission gathered, analyzed, and synthesized considerable empirical data. The Commission\u27s particular information suggests that the tribunal functions less effectively than it might. For instance, six percent of appeals currently receive a published opinion-the lowest nationwide-while two of the fifteen active circuit judgeships are vacant. Yet, these data were not refined or broad enough to ascertain definitively how the court actually performs. Indeed, the Commission made no attempt to correlate the tribunal\u27s operations and political reputation, and the group frankly acknowledged that it lacked time for a statistically meaningful assessment of the Ninth Circuit. Part III thus proffers recommendations that emphasize greater Fourth Circuit study and includes miscellaneous ideas, such as the application of concepts, namely filling all the open judgeships, that should improve the tribunal\u27s performance

Domain-independent method for developing an integrated engineering design tool

Engineering design is a complex, cognitive process requiring extensive knowledge and experience to be done effectively. Successful design depends on appropriate use of available resources. Competitive design cycles mandate convenient and reliable access to engineering tools and information. An integrated engineering design tool (IEDT) has been developed in response to these demands. Further, the tool development efforts have been made systematic by utilizing the engineering design process, which is shown to be a cognitive activity based on Bloom\u27s taxonomy of cognition. The engineering design process consists of six tasks: establishment of objectives, development of requirements, function analysis, creation of design alternatives, evaluation, and improvements to the design. These tasks are shown to map to the six levels of Bloom\u27s cognitive taxonomy: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Once engineering design is shown to be a cognitive process it can be employed to make each of the activities required to develop and IEDT, domain investigation, knowledge acquisition, and IEDT design, systematic. Past research has considered these to be largely ad hoc tasks. Application of the engineering design process to each of the three IEDT development tasks is discussed in general terms;A prototype IEDT has been created for the preliminary design of jet transport aircraft wings based on the systematic engineering design approach is used to demonstrate the implementation of the method. The IEDT is embedded in Microsoft Excel 97 with links to other software and executable code. Examples of different implementation strategies are provided. Several wing weight prediction models are included. The incorporation of depth knowledge is done using fuzzy logic. The IEDT is linked to relevant files containing design documentation, parameter information, graphics, drawings, and historical data. The designer has access to trade-off study information and sensitivity analysis and can choose to perform structural analysis or design optimization. The engineer can also consider design issues such as cost analysis. The modular IEDT has been designed to be easily adaptable by design domain experts so that it may continue to be updated and expanded

The Perils of Unpublished Non-Precedential Federal Appellate Opinions: A Case Study of the Substantive Due Process State-Created Danger Doctrine in One Circuit

About 80% of federal appellate decisions are non-precedential. This Article examines the practical consequences for district courts and litigants confronting inconsistent appellate opinions issued by the same federal circuit. Specifically, this is a case study comparing the divergent binding and non-precedential opinions applying one frequently invoked constitutional theory within the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, the state-created danger theory of substantive due process. The comparison demonstrates that the risks of non-precedential opinions are real. During the six-year interval between binding state-created danger decisions, the Third Circuit created inconsistent non-precedential opinions on the identical legal theory. Doctrinal divergence between the Third Circuit\u27s binding and non-precedential opinions has undermined the predictive value of precedential state-created danger decisions, creating an obstacle to settlement at both the trial and appellate levels. In turn, district courts\u27 unpredictable application of the non-precedential opinions has undermined the critical appellate functions of ensuring that like cases are treated alike, that judicial decisions are not arbitrary, and that legal issues resolved at the appellate level need not be relitigated before the district courts. The practice of issuing non-precedential opinions is justified on efficiency grounds, as a mechanism for overburdened appellate courts to manage their dockets. But doctrinal inconsistency between the Third Circuit\u27s precedential and non-precedential opinions undercuts the efficiency rationale because doctrinal divergences may have led plaintiffs and defendants to value cases differently-potentially leading to more litigation, fewer settlements, and additional need for judicial decision-making. This Article proposes several reforms to reduce doctrinal inconsistency between precedential and non-precedential opinions. Because an appellate court should weigh the same considerations in making each of its publication decisions, the Third Circuit should replace its amorphous publication guideline with specific criteria. The Article concludes by suggesting that, consistent with the common law tradition of empowering the applying court to assess the persuasive value of a judicial decision, the Third Circuit should no longer refuse to cite its own non-precedential opinions, and should follow several circuits in expressly according persuasive value to its non-precedential opinions