Top Banner
Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services http://www.kapsgroup.com
24

Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

Dec 13, 2015

Download

Documents

Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies

Tom ReamyChief Knowledge Architect

KAPS Group

Knowledge Architecture Professional Services

http://www.kapsgroup.com

Page 2: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

2

Agenda

Introduction– What are Folksonomies?– Advantages and Disadvantages of Folksonomies

Complexity Theory and Folksonomies– Environment, Evolutionary Mechanisms– Intelligent Design: Universe of Discourse

Conclusion– Possible Scenario’s for Evolving Order– Research Directions– Benefits

Page 3: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

3

KAPS Group

Knowledge Architecture Professional Services (KAPS) Consulting, strategy recommendations Knowledge architecture audits Partners – Convera, Inxight, FAST, and others Taxonomies: Enterprise, Marketing, Insurance, etc.

– Taxonomy customization Intellectual infrastructure for organizations

– Knowledge organization, technology, people and processes– Search, content management, portals, collaboration,

knowledge management, e-learning, etc.

Page 4: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

4

What are Folksonomies?

Wikipedia: A folksonomy is an Internet-based information retrieval methodology consisting of collaboratively generated, open-ended labels that categorize content such as Web pages, online photographs, and Web links.

A folksonomy is most notably contrasted from a taxonomy – done by users, not professionals,

Example sites – Del.icio.us and Flickr (not really – no feedback)

It is just metadata that users add Key – social mechanism for seeing other tags

Page 5: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

5

Advantages of Folksonomies

Simple (no complex structure to learn)– No need to learn difficult formal classification system

Lower cost of categorization– Distributes cost of tagging over large population

Open ended – can respond quickly to changes Quality – “compare favorably with professional”? Relevance – SME generated, close to content

– User’s own terms

Page 6: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

6

Advantages of Folksonomies

Aboutness – qualitative judgments– Reflect user’s perspective

Multiple dimensions – “communities” of like minded taggers Support serendipitous form of browsing Easy to tag any object – photo, document, bookmark Better than no tags at all

Page 7: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

7

Disadvantages of Folksonomies

They don’t work very well – polysemy, synonyms, etc.– Focus on easy tagging, not finding

Compare favorably with no tags, not controlled vocabularies No structure, no conceptual relationships

– Flats lists do not a onomy make

Jargon – SME’s talking to themselves or each other– Multiple communities – different terms

SME’s are not info professional – different skill Based on popularity only, no quality control

Page 8: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

8

Disadvantages of Folksonomies

Issues of scale – popular tags already showing 10,000’s of hits Limited applicability – only useful for non-technical or non-

specialist domains Either personal tags (other’s can’t find) or popularity tags – lose

interesting terms (Power law distribution) Errors – misspellings, single words or bad compounds, single use

or idiosyncratic use Wikipedia article – very shallow, “wrong”? – not a taxonomy at all

Page 9: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

9

Complexity Theory (abridged)History

An interdisciplinary method– Applied to math, model systems, economics, ecology, etc.

Initial Hype Period – 1980’s-1990’s– Chaos theory, Catastrophe theory, AI, etc.

Current – half way between hype and practical– Beware articles that focus on one aspect – self-organizing

Santa Fe Institute, social research, our Keynote The Center for Complex Systems Research

Page 10: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

10

Complexity Theory (abridged)Examples

Complex Systems (not complicated)– Large number of independent relatively dumb elements

interact according to a small set of rules.– Self-organizing – order emerges– Local rules, local interactions – global order emerges

Definition by Example– Ant Colonies – clear tunnels with no idea of how to clear a

tunnel– Neighborhoods – create a structure with no central planning

Page 11: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

11

Complexity Theory (abridged)Essential Features

Large numbers of elements Local Interactions Emergence – global from local Feedback Self-organization

– Key idea – often over-hyped

Importance of the environment– Often overlooked

Page 12: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

12

Complexity Theory and FolksonomiesIntelligent Design – Universe of Discourse Complexity – need right level of structure and disorder No evolution without:

– Initial complex structure– Evolutionary mechanisms – feedback with consequences

Level of structure = value of order that emerges– Color clumps, ants, neighborhood stores

Need to pay attention to initial organization structures– - “taxonomies” and metadata– Communities – users and designers

Page 13: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

13

Complexity Theory and FolksonomiesDesigning the world Wikipedia – fast cheap encyclopedia

– Not really just mass of workers making local decisions– Role of initial environment and sets of rules – Feedback everywhere - including on structure and rules– Still have designers – administrators, councils of administrators

Editor Team – like Wikipedia– Create the structured environment– Create the rules and feedback system– Tweak the evolution of the system– Analyze data, paths to monitor– Develop initial candidates – interviews, search log analysis,

ethnographic studies

Page 14: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

14

Complexity Theory and Folksonomies:Two domains – Internet and Internal – Intranet, databases Internet – this is the normal domain for folksonomies

– More content, more users/taggers– Wilder environment– Less specific targets – web sites, topical articles– Large general sites best, not specialty sites

Internal– More initial structure, more similar content– More resources for tagging– More rewards for categorization– Need authority – corporate policy– More precise targets

Page 15: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

15

Complexity Theory and Folksonomies:Two domains of evolution Structure of the folksonomies

– Bottom up – create clusters – based on co-occuring terms, other, groups of people?

– Social – have people categorize the tags and then have people rank the appropriateness of categories

– One possibility – community based agreement – more people rank a category as good – they become a community

Appropriate tags on documents– Social - Wikipedia style – everyone can tag any document

• Include evolutionary rank for taggers– Everyone can rank the appropriateness of tags– Develop rank of taggers – super-editors, editors, authors

Page 16: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

16

Complexity Theory and Folksonomies:Evolutionary Mechanisms Feedback with Consequences

– If an ant fails to follow a rule, it dies– Set up minimum number of good category or good tag ranks

by everyone – if below, it dies.– Death of tag/category – deleted or moved to unranked

primordial goo Filter to top – popularity, Tag Clouds – Del.ici.ous

– Very high level – “Blog, photography” Mutation – keywords into other categories, categories into

other categories– Success within a category – popularity, other criteria

Page 17: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

17

Complexity Theory and Folksonomies Evolutionary Mechanisms Ranking Methods

– Explicit – people rank directly (roles)• Categories, tags, taggers• Good tags, best bets for terms or categories?

– Implicit – software evaluation, reverse relevance Who will rank?

– Interested people, folksonomy advocates– Intranet – rewarded employees– Internet – community sites, aggregators, search engines

What will we call them? – Force of Nature, Deities, Intelligent Designers

Page 18: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

18

Complexity Theory and Folksonomies Scenario One: Del.icio.us Plus Social tags – only real criteria is popularity – Tag Cloud Evolve quality of tags and emerging structure of tags

– Preferred term = popular (Blog/blogs – Books/book) Add broad general taxonomy of most popular tags

– Tags as natural categories – build up and down Add mechanisms – rank tags, taggers, categories Flickr – facets are natural structure – date, people, events Start – evolve a simple 2 level taxonomy

– People assign tags to a category, build numbers– Evolutionary phase shift – spasm of structure

Page 19: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

19

Popularity Structure of FolksonomyGood, Bad, and Natural

Page 20: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

20

Complexity Theory and Folksonomies Scenario Two – Intranet/Content Aggregators

Buy/Build starter taxonomies – more structure than Del.icio.us

Create a team of designers/rules/mechanisms Develop reward structures Feedback – about tags – from employees or customers Feedback about taggers, categories – from central team

with input from selected SME’s. Add evolution to best bets – compete with management

selected

Page 21: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

21

Complexity Theory and FolksonomiesResearch and Theory

Research Ideas– Uncover the effects of “interwingledness”

• Monitor how people tag (and categorize) – historical patterns

• Who would do this? Institute? Flickr? Other commercial?

• Design new metrics and reports?

– Discover natural category levels• Take terms as candidates for natural level

• Build structure up and down

• Apply communities – different natural levels

• Simplicity – expose taxonomy at natural level - keywords

Page 22: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

22

Conclusions: Evolutionary Model

Need to design a complex system, not complicated or free form

Different design for four domains: Internet-Internal, Categories-Tags

Advanced feedback is necessary Editor Function is necessary

– Develop infrastructure, analyze feedback, facilitate Order is grown – from a combination of bottom up and

design Management is suggesting rules and testing and gathering

feedback about usefulness, not dictating correct terms

Page 23: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

23

Complexity Theory and FolksonomiesBenefits

Add the onomy to folk– More structure at low cost

Benefits of research – Investigation itself yields ideas

Internal Domain – supplemented by traditional methods, taxonomies, controlled vocabularies

If it fails, at least could kill the term, foksonomy (It’s metadata)

Page 24: Evolving Folksonomies Complexity Theory & Folksonomies Tom Reamy Chief Knowledge Architect KAPS Group Knowledge Architecture Professional Services .

Questions?

Tom [email protected]

KAPS Group

Knowledge Architecture Professional Services

http://www.kapsgroup.com