A Specialised Social Network Software Architecture for Efficient Household Water Use Management

  • Zhenchen WangEmail author
  • Andrea Capiluppi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9278)


Specialised, or vertical, social networks (SSN) are emerging as a useful tool to address practical issues such as household water use management. Despite the perceived benefits, the design of such systems is still not fully aware of the social interactions or the incentives that could be used to change user’s behaviours when engaging with the network and peers. In this work, we propose and demonstrate the software architecture of a social network aimed at the efficient management of water in households, defining and connecting specialised system components. Three aspects are relevant in this work: first, the architecture explicitly defines components that support social interactions, in the context of existing water management instruments. Second, the architecture defines components addressing openness, which enable easy communication with external resources. Third, as part of a gamification ecosystem, universal and transferable rewards are proposed to incentivise the expected online and offline behaviours.


Software architecture Software engineering Specialised social network Social interaction 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Borcea, C., Gupta, A., Kalra, A., Jones, Q., Tftode, L.: The MobiSoC middleware for mobile social computing: challenges, design, and early experiences. In: Proceedings of Mobile Wireless Middleware, Operating Systems, and Applications (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burke, M., Marlow, C., Lento, T.: Feed me: motivating newcomer contribution in social network sites. In: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 945–954. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Centola, D.: The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science 329(5996), 1194 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dietrich, J., Jones N.: Using social networking and semantic web technology in software engineering–use cases, patterns, and a case study. In: 18th Australian Software Engineering Conference, ASWEC 2007, pp. 129−136, April 10−13, 2007Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, July 12, 2002Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fogg, B.: A behavior model for persuasive design. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology (Persuasive 2009), Article 40, 7 p. ACM, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Greenwood, P., Rashid, A., Walkerdine, J.: UDesignIt: towards social media for community-driven design. In: 2012 34th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 1321−1324, June 2−9, 2012Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grizzell, J.: Behaviour Change Theories and Models: relating to health promotion and education efforts. American College Health Association (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Michlrnayr, A., Leitner, P., Rosenberg, F., Dustdar, S.: Publish/subscribe in the VRESCo SOA runtirne. In: Proceedings of Distributed Event-Based Systems (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miklas, A.G., Gollu, K.K., Chan, K.K., Saroiu, S., Gummadi, K.P., de Lara, E.: Exploiting social interactions in mobile systems. In: Krumm, J., Abowd, G.D., Seneviratne, A., Strang, T. (eds.) UbiComp 2007. LNCS, vol. 4717, pp. 409–428. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Murphy-Hill, E.: Continuous social screencasting to facilitate software tool discovery. In: 2012 34th International Conference on, Software Engineering (ICSE), pp. 1317−1320, June 2–9, 2012Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Olson, M.: The logic of collective action: Public goods and the theory of groups. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1971)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rainer, N.: Software Component Architecture [PDF].
  14. 14.
    Savenjie, H., Van, Z.: Water as an economic good and demand management, paradigms with pitfalls. International Water Resources Association, Water International 27(1), 98–104 (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sebastian, D., Dan, D., Rilla, K., Lennart, N.: From game design elements to gamefulness: defining “Gamification”. In: Proceedings of MindTrek 2011. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tullock, G.: The paradox of revolution. Public Choice 11, 89–99 (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhang, C., Cheng, C., Ji, Y.: Architecture design for social web of things. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Context Discovery and Data Mining (ContextDD 2012). ACM, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhong, Y., Zhao, W., Yang, J.: Personal-hosting RESTful web services for social network based recommendation. In: Kappel, G., Maamar, Z., Motahari-Nezhad, H.R. (eds.) ICSOC 2011. LNCS, vol. 7084, pp. 661–668. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Brunel University LondonUxbridge, MiddlesexUK

Personalised recommendations