Archive for the ‘trust’ Category

JTAER special issue on trust and trust management

Thursday, August 19th, 2010

The Open Access Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research has just published a special issue on trust and trust management (volume 5, issue 2, 2010), with Audun Jøsang and Glenn Bewsell as guest editors. While I am of course particularly happy that our paper on trust management for inter-enterprise collaborations appears there (see my earlier summary on what we do at the CINCO group), there are other reasons to go check out the issue too:

  • Transferring reputation ratings from one virtual community to another (Gal-Oz, Grinshpoun and Gudes) – another step towards reputation interoperability.
  • Ethnographic investigation of privacy issues in sharing personal photographs online (Cunningham, Masoodian and Adams).
  • Trust and fear influencing team-based global software development (Casey).
  • Quality processes and auditing as part of reputation management in eCommerce services (Alnemr, Koenig, Eymann and Meinel).
  • Privacy-aware trust management framework prototyped and examined through an employability case study (Böhm, Etalle, Hartog, Hütter, Traberlsi, Trivellato and Zannone).
  • A survey of a handful of trust and reputation systems and a comparison framework (Noorian and Ulieru) – I love surveys!
  • Technological, individual and social drivers of trust within digital ecosystems – (Wiedmann, Hennings, Varelmann and

    Reeh).

  • I already mentioned our paper on reputation-based risk-aware trust management (Ruohomaa and Kutvonen), so I shouldn’t repeat it here. But it’s there! It summarizes a sizable part of my PhD thesis contribution, which I’ve spent the last eternity polishing. (Said book is once again “finally done”, sent to my supervisor today. We shall see.)

I will now go celebrate my momentary victory over writing – by reading.

CAT workshop: trust management, web 2.0, privacy, and context.

Monday, February 16th, 2009

That’s a great possibility to submit work on trust & context management with emphasis on web 2.0 and on privacy protection. Deadline: 13th/20th of March. Submit, submit, submit ;-) This call could not be better timed.

Future work on reputation systems for mobiles: first-hand experiences or recommendations?

Friday, February 6th, 2009

Reputation systems on mobile phones build “reputation scores” based on personal experiences and on other phones’ recommendations. One poorly-explored research question is when to use personal experiences and when to resort to recommendations. This paper in Biology Letter may suggest few future research directions:

(more…)

Papers at RecSys 2008

Monday, October 27th, 2008

A lot of interesting papers have been discussed during RecSys conference. Here are a few list of interesting ones.

(more…)

Trusted Computing: Sounds Great, Doesn’t it?

Tuesday, September 30th, 2008

There is an interesting short video here about trusted computing. Consider it an amateur introduction to what a lot of recent research has been discussing, and perhaps a useful video to spark some discussion with non-research friends.

However, there is a twist in the short- a  doubt about the utlity of trust, once trust decision are made by a machine rather than a person. Do you agree?

Ubicomp 2008

Monday, September 29th, 2008

Many blogs have been covering Ubicomp and, a couple of days ago, I promised to write down my own coverage. Here you go ;-)

The first day I attended the Automated Journeys workshop organized by Arianna Bassoli (who gave a talk at UCL a while back), Johanna Brewer (whose recent work has been covered here; for more, check her blog), and . The workshop’s format was not  traditional. As part of the workshop, we went out and had lunch :-), and, while doing so, we observed how people in Seoul use technologies.  Then, we came back and, through group discussions and hands-on design brainstorming sessions, we produced  4 envisagements that  critically reflected on technological futures. It was very engaging! I hope other workshops will replicate/mutate this format. I wished I could attend at least two of the  other workshops on offer: Ubiquitous Systems Evaluation partly organized by Chris Kray (I am in debt with him, and he knows why ;-)) and Devices that Alter Perception partly organized by Carson Reynolds.

At Ubicomp, the speakers did not suffer from powerpoint karaoke syndrome, and their slides were generally  well-designed – less text, more images. That is largely because the ubicomp’s community is made of design-conscious (CHI) researchers. Few talks are already available on slideshare.

Here are few papers I personally found intriguing because of their algorithms, their evaluation, or their interesting ideas. At the end of this post, I’ll point to few datasets that have been used and can be of interest ;-)

1. Algorithms

Navigate Like a Cabbie: Probabilistic Reasoning from Observed Context-Aware Behavior. Brian D. Ziebart showed a new way of making route predictions. He used a probabilistic model  presented at AAAI “Maximum Entropy Inverse Reinforcement Learning“.  Interestingly, he showed that the model works upon data that is noisy and imperfect.

Pedestrian Localisation for Indoor Environments. Oliver Woodman proposed a way of  tracking people indoor. Oliver and Robert showed how to combine a foot-mounted unit, a building model, and a particle filter to track people in a building. They experimentally showed that users can be effectively tracked within 1m without knowing their initial positions. Great results! It’s a paper well worth reading!

Discovery of Activity Patterns using Topic Models. Bernt Schiele presented a new method for recognizing a person’s activities from wearable sensors.  This method adapts probabilistic topic models and has been shown to recognize daily routines without user annotation.  One of Bernt’s students had an interesting poster on detecting location transitition using sensor data (pdf).

2. Evaluation

A couple of papers (including the great work done by Matthew Lee)  used a method called the Wizard of Oz evaluation. The general idea is to simulate those parts of the system (e.g., speech recognition) that require most effort in terms of development or to assess the suitability of your interface(see “Wizard of Oz studies – why and how” (pdf) for more).

Flowers or a Robot Army? Encouraging Awareness & Activity with Personal, Mobile Displays by Sunny Consolvo et al.  They designed a system that makes it possible for mobile users to self-monitor their physical activities and conducted a greatly designed 3-month field experiment.

Reflecting on the Invisible: Understanding End-User Perceptions of Ubiquitous Computing (pdf). Erika Shehan Poole detailed end-user perceptions of RFID technology using an interesting qualitative method that combines structured interviews and photo elicitation excercises. Erika and her mates show that, by using this method, one is able to uncover perceptions that are often difficult for study participants to verbalize.  One of her findings: many people believed that RFID can be used to remotely tract the location of tagged objects, people, or animals!

3. Interesting Ideas

Bookisheet: Bendable Device for Browsing Content Using the Metaphor of Leafing Through the Pages. Trash your mouse. Jun-ichiro Watanabe presented a VERY promising interface (a book made of two thin plastic sheets and bend sensors) with which  a user can easily scroll digital content such as photos. The user  does so by simply bending one side of the sheet or the other.

Towards the Automated Social Analysis of Situated Speech Data. To automatically understand individual and group behavior, Danny Wyatt et al. recorded the coversational dynamics of 24 people over 6 months. They did so using privacy-sensitive techniques. By using this type of studies, researchers may well  gain broad sociological insights.

The Potential for Location-Aware Power ManagementRobert Harle showed how to dinamically optimize the energy consumption of an office. Very interesting problem-driven research!


Accessible Contextual Information for Urban Orientation
. Jason Stewart  presented a prototype of a location-based  service with which mobile users share content (see their project’s website)

Enhanced Shopping: A Dynamic Map in a Retail Store.  Alexander Meschtscherjakov  presented a prototype for mobile phones that displays  customer activities (e.g., customer flow) inside a shopping mall

Spyn: Augmenting Knitting to Support Storytelling and Reflection (pdf). Daniela K. Rosner‘s presentation was masterfully designed! She walked us through her expirience of designing Spyn – a system for knitters to record, playback, and share information involved in the creation of their hand-knit artifacts. She showed how her system enriches the knitter’s craft

Picture This! Film assembly using toy gestures. Cati Vaucelle (who keeps a cool blog) presented a new input device embedded in children’s toys for video composition.  As they play with the toys to act out a story, children conduct film assembly.

4. Datasets

Understanding Mobility Based on GPS Data by et al. used GPS logs of 65 people over 10 months (the largest dataset in the community!) to evaluate a new way of  inferring people’s motion modes from their GPS logs

Accurate Activity Recognition in a Home Setting (pdf) by Tim van Kasteren et al. used 28 days of sensor data about one person @ home and corresponding annotations of his activities (e.g., toileting, showering, etc.) to evaluate a new method for recognizing activities from sensor data.

Discovery of Activity Patterns using Topic Models by Tam Huynh et al. used 16 days of sensor data from a man who was carrying  2 wearable sensors to test their method for automatically recognizing activities (e.g., dinner, commuting, lunch, office work) from sensor data.

On Using Existing Time-Use Study Data for Ubiquitous Compting Applications by Kurt Partridge and Philippe Golle how to use data (e.g. people’s activities and locations) that has been collected by governments and commercial institutions to evaluate ubicomp systems.

The Potential for Location-Aware Power Management by Rober Harletested on location data of 40 people in 50-room office building for 60 working days his proposed strategies for dinamically optimizing the energy consumption of an office.

(ubicomp2008)

Weaving a Web of Trust

Saturday, September 27th, 2008

Jennifer wrote a piece (which is well worth reading) in Science Magazine: “Increasingly, people are studying social and collaborative Web technologies for use in science. However, issues such as privacy, confidentiality, and trust arise around the use of these technologies. Science is crucially based on knowing provenance–who produced what, how and where–and on the Web, trusting scientific information is becoming more difficult for both scientists and the general public. User-generated content, even from professionals, can be opinionated (both informed and uninformed), inaccurate, and deceiving.” More.

The Comedy of the Trusted Commons

Saturday, August 16th, 2008

commons
Last week, The Economist had an interesting piece (pdf) on the tragedy of the commons.

  • In 1968 Garrett Hardin, a professor of biology, published an article in the journal Science that explained “The Tragedy of the Commons”. He suggested that, from the point of view of efficiency, the commons should be replaced by systems of public or personal ownership. However, when economists began to look at how systems of commonly managed resources actually worked, they found to their surprise that they often worked quite well. Though there were failures, too, it seemed as if good management could stave off the tragedy. Before he died, Hardin admitted he should have called his article “The Tragedy of the Unmanaged Commons”. In “Governing the Commons”, which was published in 1990, Elinor Ostrom of Indiana University described the rules needed to keep a commons going. She showed that there are almost always elaborate conventions over who can use resources and when.

It is all about en-powering people who use the common resource. Case in point from my  past (luckily!) research life: people who are willing to share their Internet connections face the problem (tragedy) of free-riders – individuals who exploit the bandwidth of others without providing an adequate return. To isolate free-riders, people run trust models on their computers (pdf). A trust model is a piece of software that keeps track of who shares her connection and who doesn’t. By managing the common, trust models turn the tragedy into “The Comedy of the Managed Commons” ;-)

Trust Meeting at Secrypt

Sunday, July 27th, 2008

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)
Session 1
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.

Session 2
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.

Session 3
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!

Advertise to the Influencers

Friday, July 11th, 2008

Google has applied for a patent for a method that seeks to identify who the “influencers” in a social network are (see related blog post here). This is interesting- the idea of identifying structure and influence in graphs has been around for quite some time, but now there is a money-making application: serve targetted adds to the influencers. Will this affect how innovations are diffused throughout society? This also seems to reinforce a related post (assuming your influence is proportional to how much people trust you): “trust is not evenly distributed.”

Summary of IFIPTM'08 conference sessions

Monday, June 23rd, 2008

The IFIP trust management conference, this year joined for the second time with the Privacy, Security and Trust (PST) conference, was held in June 18th – 20th in Trondheim, Norway. The conference has also been previously known as iTrust. Next year, PST and IFIPTM split again, as PST returns to its roots as a local event in Canada; next year, IFIPTM is organized in the US, and in Japan after that. We’ve summarized IFIPTM workshops on Monday and Tuesday in earlier posts, and now give a quick run-through of what this year’s conference program held.

(more…)

IFIPTM Monday workshops (CAT, W2Trust)

Monday, June 23rd, 2008

The Monday workshop sessions of IFIPTM 2008 were a combination of the second workshop on Context-awareness and trust (CAT) and first workshop on Web 2.0 trust (W2Trust). See the W2Trust website for the full list of papers. In this post, we summarize what we saw.

(more…)

Intl Workshop on Trust in Mobile Environments

Wednesday, June 18th, 2008

Yesterday was the first International Workshop on Trust in Mobile Environments (TIME 2008), co-located with the IFIPTM 08 conference in Trondheim, Norway. The workshop merged with the Workshop on Sustaining Privacy in Autonomous Collaborative Environments (SPACE), and consisted of three sessions. Here is a brief summary on what we saw: (more…)

ACM SAC 2009

Thursday, June 5th, 2008

CALL FOR PAPERS – SAC 2009

The 24th ACM Symposium on Applied Computing
at the Hilton Hawaiian Village Beach Resort & Spa
Waikiki Beach, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA
http://www.acm.org/conferences/sac/sac2009/

IMPORTANT DUE DATES
Aug. 16, 2008: Full paper submission
Oct. 11, 2008: Author notification
Oct. 25, 2008: Camera-ready copy
Mar. 8-12, 2009: ACM SAC in Hawaii, USA

(more…)

Conference on Reputation

Wednesday, June 4th, 2008

First International Conference on Reputation

What: Work on Reputation from a multidisciplinary standpoint

Where: Tuscany, Italy

When: March 2009