A Goal Matching Service for Facilitating Public Collaboration Using Linked Open Data

  • Shun Shiramatsu
  • Teemu Tossavainen
  • Tadachika Ozono
  • Toramatsu Shintani
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8654)

Abstract

Inter-organizational collaboration in the public sphere is essentially important to address sustainability problems in contemporary regional societies. To facilitate public collaboration, we are developing a Web application for sharing public issues and their solutions as public goals. Since participating in abstract or general goals is more difficult than concrete or specific ones, our system provides a functionality to break down individual public goals into concrete subgoals. Our Web application, GoalShare, is based on a linked open dataset of public goals that are linked with titles, participants, subgoals, related issues, related articles, and related geographic regions. GoalShare recommends public goals and users on the basis of similarity calculations taking into account not only surficial and semantic features but also contextual features extracted from subgoals and supergoals. We conducted experiments to investigate the effects of contextual features in subgoals and supergoals. Moreover, we conducted a trial workshop with GoalShare in Ogaki city to improve system design through actual use.

Keywords

linked data civic tech public involvement concern assessment text mining 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Motesharrei, S., Rivas, J., Kalnay, E.: Human and Nature Dynamics (HANDY): Modeling inequality and use of resources in the collapse or sustainability of societies. Ecological Economics 101, 90–102 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shi, P., Li, N., Ye, Q., Dong, W., Han, G., Fang, W.: Research on integrated disaster risk governance in the context of global environmental change. International Journal of Disaster Risk Science 1(1), 17–23 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yamamoto, K.: Volunteer activities in time of disaster in japan’s highly information-oriented society. Journal of Earth Science and Engineering 3(3), 190–202 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yamaguchi, M., Maguth, B.: Using social networking in the social studies for global citizenship: A case study of japan’s 3:11 quake. In: Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2012, pp. 3260–3287 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shiramatsu, S., Ozono, T., Shintani, T.: Approaches to assessing public concerns: Building linked data for public goals and criteria extracted from textual content. In: Wimmer, M.A., Tambouris, E., Macintosh, A. (eds.) ePart 2013. LNCS, vol. 8075, pp. 109–121. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tossavainen, T., Shiramatsu, S., Ozono, T., Shintani, T.: Implementing a system enabling open innovation by sharing public goals based on linked open data. In: Ali, M., Pan, J.-S., Chen, S.-M., Horng, M.-F. (eds.) IEA/AIE 2014, Part II. LNCS, vol. 8482, pp. 98–108. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Roth, A.E., Sotomayor, M.A.O.: Two-Sided Matching: A Study in Game-Theoretic Modeling and Analysis. Econometric Society Monographs, vol. 18. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1990)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim, S., Mabin, V.J., Davies, J.: The theory of constraints thinking processes: retrospect and prospect. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 28(2), 155–184 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Blei, D.M., Ng, A.Y., Jordan, M.I.: Latent Dirichlet Allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3, 993–1022 (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Teh, Y., Jordan, M., Beal, M., Blei, D.: Hierarchical dirichlet processes. Journal of the American Statistical Association 101(476), 1566–1581 (2006)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    AGI: The theory of constraints and its thinking processes - a brief introduction to toc, http://www.goldratt.com/pdfs/toctpwp.pdf (2009)
  12. 12.
    PMI: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, 4th edn. Project Management Institute (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cheng, J., Shigekawa, K., Meguro, K., Yamazaki, F., Nakagawa, I., Hayashi, H., Tamura, K.: Applying the toc logistic process to clarify the problem schemes of near-field earthquake in tokyo metropolitan area. Journal of social safety science (11), 225–233 (2009) (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ohara, M., Kondo, S., Kou, T., Numada, M., Meguro, K.: Overview of social issues after the great east-japan earthquake disaster - part 3 of activity reports of 3.11net tokyo. SEISAN KENKYU 63(6), 749–754 (2011) (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    McLaughlin, J.A., Jordan, G.B.: Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story. Evaluation and program planning 22(1), 65–72 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Innovation Network: Logic model workbook, http://www.innonet.org/client_docs/File/logic_model_workbook.pdf(2005)
  17. 17.
    Benn, N., Macintosh, A.: Argument visualization for eparticipation: towards a research agenda and prototype tool. In: Tambouris, E., Macintosh, A., de Bruijn, H. (eds.) ePart 2011. LNCS, vol. 6847, pp. 60–73. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    De Liddo, A., Buckingham Shum, S.: The Evidence Hub: Harnessing the collective intelligence of communities to build evidence-based knowledge. In: 6th International Conference on Communities and Technologies, Large-Scale Idea Management and Deliberation Systems Workshop (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Iandoli, L., Klein, M., Zolla, G.: Enabling online deliberation and collective decision making through large-scale argumentation: A new approach to the design of an internet-based mass collaboration platform. International Journal of Decision Support System Technology 1(1), 69–92 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    van den Braak, S.W., van Oostendorp, H., Prakken, H., Vreeswijk, G.A.W.: A critical review of argument visualization tools: Do users become better reasoners? In: Workshop Notes of the ECAI-2006 Workshop on CMNA, pp. 67–75 (2006)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shun Shiramatsu
    • 1
  • Teemu Tossavainen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tadachika Ozono
    • 1
  • Toramatsu Shintani
    • 1
  1. 1.Graduate School of EngineeringNagoya Institute of TechnologyJapan
  2. 2.School of ScienceAalto UniversityFinland

Personalised recommendations