Jump to content

Talk:Discourse Modeling: Difference between revisions

Talk:Discourse Modeling (view source)

Revision as of 09:16, 13 November 2022

86 bytes removed ,  09:16, 13 November 2022
First cleanup pass on formatting
(First cleanup pass on formatting)
Line 44: Line 44:
**[[claim]] this means take db backend, ingest it, execute queries against it
**[[claim]] this means take db backend, ingest it, execute queries against it
**[[claim]] viz may not be super-sophisticated, but a view or 2 framed on each node type would be worthwhile: eg how does a question related to claims, how are claims informed by different articles (evidence)
**[[claim]] viz may not be super-sophisticated, but a view or 2 framed on each node type would be worthwhile: eg how does a question related to claims, how are claims informed by different articles (evidence)
*[[claim] ]need to populate the wiki with the elements of a discourse graph --> create viz --> share code
*[[claim]] need to populate the wiki with the elements of a discourse graph --> create viz --> share code
* SJ: [[question]]  can we accomplish naming: coming up with names for each of those components, and names for things at different scales - discussion, family of hypotheses, family of experiments
*SJ: [[question]]  can we accomplish naming: coming up with names for each of those components, and names for things at different scales - discussion, family of hypotheses, family of experiments
**[[claim]]this will allow us to say that if you have identified x ideas, hypotheses, etc - how many discourses do you need to describe? how many graphs are needed to illustrate those discourses - when are people working on the same graph?
**[[claim]] this will allow us to say that if you have identified x ideas, hypotheses, etc - how many discourses do you need to describe? how many graphs are needed to illustrate those discourses - when are people working on the same graph?
**[[question]] what does it mean to have different graphs that share some pieces, or different graphs in or close to the same namespace
**[[question]] what does it mean to have different graphs that share some pieces, or different graphs in or close to the same namespace
**[[claim]] these issues  --> boil down to the naming of the pieces and how you place the connections - how much context do you need to figure out how many connections there are?
**[[claim]] these issues  --> boil down to the naming of the pieces and how you place the connections - how much context do you need to figure out how many connections there are?
* - KM: taking this as an opportunity to  learn SPARQL
*KM: taking this as an opportunity to  learn SPARQL
*KM: [[claim]] we need namespaces before we can query anything - naming is critical!
*KM: [[claim]] we need namespaces before we can query anything - naming is critical!
*SJ: [[claim]] we should name and make list of queries - queries nee their own names
*SJ: [[claim]] we should name and make list of queries - queries nee their own names
* KM: [[question]] what is  agora?
*KM: [[question]] what is  agora?
*SJ: [[claim]] agora is a group of people interested in wiki linking and editable networks & knowledge federation
*SJ: [[claim]] agora is a group of people interested in wiki linking and editable networks & knowledge federation
*[[claim]] agora's goals include:
**[[claim]] agora's goals include:
* - make linking always do something sensible - best effort connection between links
***make linking always do something sensible - best effort connection between links
* - agora is a url pattern that will try to resolve it
***agora is a url pattern that will try to resolve it
* - redirect strings to appropriate resources
***redirect strings to appropriate resources
* - each reader gets a filter - only see certain nodes & connection based on sort preferences  
***each reader gets a filter - only see certain nodes & connection based on sort preferences  
* - KM: [[claim]] sounds like auto-complete for knowledge graphs
**KM: [[claim]] sounds like auto-complete for knowledge graphs
* - each agora has a few default sections - ex will try to generate related out nodes, related agoras you know with the same title or fuzzy match, any text it finds in your own agaora ad-hov
**each agora has a few default sections - ex will try to generate related out nodes, related agoras you know with the same title or fuzzy match, any text it finds in your own agora ad-hoc
* - elevate DGs by making a section that tries to generate a dg or discourses that mention this node
**elevate DGs by making a section that tries to generate a dg or discourses that mention this node
*[[claim]] dg is a shape you compile on the fly - could try to  generate a dg x steps away and show you different families that might be referencing this
*[[claim]] dg is a shape you compile on the fly - could try to  generate a dg x steps away and show you different families that might be referencing this
** [[claim]s pirit of the agora is automatic discovery & openness to engagement
** [[claim]s pirit of the agora is automatic discovery & openness to engagement
Line 67: Line 67:
*** SJ: [[claim]] diff between creating a new link with the same name as your node and creating a link to your specific node
*** SJ: [[claim]] diff between creating a new link with the same name as your node and creating a link to your specific node
***KK: [[question]] diff between agora and what we envision?
***KK: [[question]] diff between agora and what we envision?
* - sj: no typology of links
**sj: no typology of links
* - graph visualization does not ignore non-typed connections
**graph visualization does not ignore non-typed connections
* - KH: existing descriptions of agora other than the site itself?
**KH: existing descriptions of agora other than the site itself?
* - KK:what actions will  we need to take to get where we want to go?
**KK:what actions will  we need to take to get where we want to go?
* - how do we turn parts of this wiki into the components of a dg?
**how do we turn parts of this wiki into the components of a dg?
* - KM: we have folks write and annotate in the wiki and use the annotation capabiliies of SMW to call out what the node types are
**KM: we have folks write and annotate in the wiki and use the annotation capabiliies of SMW to call out what the node types are
* - getting the data into the wiki is literally people interacting and annotating
**getting the data into the wiki is literally people interacting and annotating
* - but first we need to figure out naming and schema
**but first we need to figure out naming and schema
* - template objects, other objects, tools that can be used to define the schema
**template objects, other objects, tools that can be used to define the schema
* - KH: prefer many short examples
**KH: prefer many short examples
* - SJ: like the idea of a self-referntial discourse about the state of discourse graphs
**SJ: like the idea of a self-referntial discourse about the state of discourse graphs
* - question: can  a discourse be a bout a topic? are discourses about a certtain over-arching hypothesis where you make claims and discover evidence?
**question: can  a discourse be a bout a topic? are discourses about a certtain over-arching hypothesis where you make claims and discover evidence?
* - KH: what do you do when your discourse does not fit a Dg?
**KH: what do you do when your discourse does not fit a Dg?
* - (examples from physics with no well-posed question)
**examples from physics with no well-posed question)
* - (discussion of results graphs and requests for experiments)
**discussion of results graphs and requests for experiments)
* - need to figure out how DGs work in these differnt fields and circumstances
**need to figure out how DGs work in these differnt fields and circumstances
* - sj: meta: need to identify existing discourse maps, and existing graphs, that could be thought of as d.g.s
**sj: meta: need to identify existing discourse maps, and existing graphs, that could be thought of as d.g.s
* - (proofs, discourse diagrams, text summarization graphs, argument maps, decision maps + flowcharts, ...)
**proofs, discourse diagrams, text summarization graphs, argument maps, decision maps + flowcharts, ...)
*  
*  
* - sj: need to capture axioms / assumptions
**sj: need to capture axioms / assumptions
* - kh: making tacit knowledge explicit!!
**kh: making tacit knowledge explicit!!
*
*


Khinsen
35

edits

Retrieved from "https://synthesis.jon-e.net/Special:MobileDiff/1316"