We presented an invited paper (pdf) at a meeting on how to manage trust in percom at Secrypt. The paper is about how to offer digital content to mobile users by combining tagging with reputation systems (previous post). Here is my presentation:
Few words on:
1) The meeting (3 sessions)
Existing reputation systems often set initial user’s reputation to a fixed value (e.g., 0.5 if reputation is expressed on a scale [0,1]). Christian proposed interesting ways for setting initial trust other than fixing ad-hoc values. Juri Luca of L3S followed by presenting a review of policy languages for trust management. Ioanna of Uni of Nicosia concluded the first session by showing a way of formalizing trust relationships that change over time.
I started the session (no more self-publicity ;-)). Zhen Yan followed and showed a way of managing trust in autonomic computing for healthcare. Finally, Andre concluded the second section by putting forward a secure interface for e-voting terminals – he documented a very interesting evaluation in his well-written paper.
Gabriele started off by presenting a new way of assigning weights to user ratings. This way allows for personalizing ratings, and that is beneficial because it makes it possible for two individuals
to have different opinions about the trustworthiness of the same person (which may well happen in reality). My tip: this research may well be complemented by “sentiment analysis” (e.g., see this paper in pdf). Ben Aziz of CCLRC concluded the third session and presented a reputation system for grid computing.
A big thanks goes to Mari for wonderfully organizing and chairing the three sessions
2) The conference (3 points)
- Petteri & his working mates of VTT collected 40K ideas for future mobile services from passionate users and stored them in the “idea database” (InnoBar is the most recent of those databases, which include: Mefi, Owela, and Idealiiike – the last two only in finnish). One interesting problem is how to bring order in that long list of ideas. Of course, one way for doing so is to resort to the wisdom of the crowd – during the Q&A session, Petteri told me that it’s difficult to have users rate ideas. How about having a crowd of paid (technology) experts? (paper: ON EXPLORING CONSUMERS’ TECHNOLOGY FORESIGHT CAPABILITIES)
- Mari Ervasti studied which factors facilitate the acceptance of mobile services by proposing a modified version of the Technology Acceptance Model (paper: ADOPTION OF MOBILE SERVICES IN FINLAND - Conceptual Model and Application-based Case Study).
- Niklas Eriksson presented three websites they developed for enabling mobile tourism services: MobiPortal, TraveLog, and MobiTour (paper: MOBILE TOURISM SERVICES – Experiences from Three Services on Trial).
Pls feel free to add whatever I’ve forgotten to mention in the comment section below. Cheers!