Call for Papers: 3rd Workshop on Information Credibility on the Web

January 18th, 2009 by Martin

The 3rd Workshop on Information Credibility on the Web (WICOW 2009) will be held on April 20th or 21st, 2009, in conjunction with the 18th World Wide Web Conference in Madrid, Spain!


As computers and computer networks become more common, a huge amount of information, such as that found in Web documents, has been accumulated and circulated. Such information gives many people a framework for organizing their private and professional lives. However, in general, the quality control of Web content is insufficient due to low publishing barriers. In result there is a lot of mistaken or unreliable information on the Web that can have detrimental effects on users. This situation calls for technology that would facilitate judging the trustworthiness of content and the quality and accuracy of the information that users encounter on the Web. Such technology should be able to handle a wide range of tasks: extracting credible information related to a given topic, organizing this information, detecting its provenance, clarifying background, facts, and other related opinions and the distribution of them, and so on. The problem of Web information reliability and Web data quality has become also apparent in the view of the recent emergence of many popular Web 2.0 applications, the growth of the so-called Deep Web and the ubiquity of Internet advertising.


The aim of this workshop is to provide a forum for discussion on issues related to information credibility criteria and the process of its evaluation. We invite submissions on any aspect of information credibility on the Web. Topics include, but are not limited to:

  • Information credibility evaluation and its applications
  • Web content analysis for credibility evaluation
  • Author’s intent detection
  • Credibility of Web search results
  • Search models and applications for trustworthy content on the Web
  • Conflicting opinion detection
  • Online media and news credibility
  • Multimedia content credibility
  • Credibility evaluation of user-generated content (e.g., Wikipedia, question answering sites)
  • Information credibility evaluation in social networks and Web 2.0 applications
  • Analysis of information dissemination on the Web (e.g., in blogosphere)
  • Spatial and temporal aspects in information credibility on the Web
  • Information credibility theory and fundamentals
  • Estimation of information age, provenance and validity
  • Estimation of author’s and publisher’s reputation
  • Sociological and psychological aspects of information credibility estimation
  • Users study for information credibility evaluation
  • Persuasive technologies
  • Information credibility in online advertising and Internet monetization
  • Web spam detection
  • Data consistency and provenance
  • Processing uncertain data and information


Title: User Generated Content: How Good it is?

Speaker: Ricardo Baeza-Yates (Yahoo! Research)

Abstract: See website.


February 3, 2009 - Page submission deadline
February 26, 2009 - Notification of acceptance
March 6, 2009 - Camera ready deadline
April 20 or 21, 2009 - Workshop


Submissions should be sent in English in PDF format. Papers should adhere to ACM formatting guidelines and be no longer than 8 pages. They must be original and have not been submitted for publication elsewhere. We encourage also submission of position papers outlining interesting research directions.


Katsumi Tanaka (Kyoto University, Japan)
Xiaofang Zhou (University of Queensland, Australia)
Adam Jatowt (Kyoto University, Japan)

Program Committee:

Witold Abramowicz (Poznan University of Economics, Poland)
Sourav S Bhowmick (Nanyang Technological University, Singapore)
Yunbo Cao (Microsoft Research Asia, China)
James Caverlee (Texas A&M University, USA)
David Danielson (Stanford University, USA)
Jean-Yves Delort (Macquarie University, Australia)
Ke Deng (University of Queensland, Australia)
Pavel Dmitriev (Yahoo!, USA)
Rino Falcone (CNR, Italy)
Marta Indulska (University of Queensland, Australia)
Kentaro Inui (NAIST, Japan)
Daxin Jiang (Microsoft Research Asia, China)
Yoshikiyo Kato (NICT, Japan)
Nick Koudas (University of Toronto, Canada)
Marek Kowalkiewicz (SAP Research, Australia)
Sadao Kurohashi (Kyoto University, Japan)
Chen Li (UC Irvine, USA)
Ee-Peng Lim (Singapore Management University, Singapore)
Li Ma (IBM Research, China)
Yutaka Matsuo (University of Tokyo, Japan)
Martin Memmel (DFKI, Germany)
Miriam Metzger (UCSB, USA)
Sudha Ram (University of Arizona, USA)
Shazia Sadiq (University of Queensland, Australia)
Kazutoshi Sumiya (University of Hyogo, Japan)
Wei Wang (University of New South Wales, Australia)
Martin Wolpers (Fraunhofer FIT, Germany)
Xiaochun Yang (Northeastern University, China)
Masatoshi Yoshikawa (Kyoto University, Japan)

You find more information about the workshop here.

MACE at the Biennale in Venice

September 16th, 2008 by Martin

A long time ago since I blogged here the last time. A lot has happened - e.g., ALOE has become part of the European Project MACE (Metadata for Architectural Contents in Europe). Its aim is to create a common infrastructure for enriching and retrieving educational contents about architecture in Europe. In MACE, ALOE is used as a social layer - it allows users to tag, rate and comment on MACE resources, to create personal portfolios, and to contribute new resources.

Right now, MACE is presenting the mæve installation at the Venice Biennale. The aim is to connect the entries of the EveryVille student competition, and to put them into the larger context of MACE content and metadata. Visitors can place physical project cards on an interactive surface, exploring an organic network of projects, people and media.

Maeve installation at Architecture Biennale Venice from Maeve installation on Vimeo.

I think it looks absolutely amazing - Kudos to the developers: the Interface Design team of the University of Applied Sciences Potsdam. Great job! I’m looking very much forward to see the installation live this weekend!

Taskonomy vs Taxonomy

August 14th, 2006 by Martin

Classifying content is a often a very difficult task, because there’s not THE right way to do it. It always depends…
In his nice article Logic Versus Usage: The Case for Activity-Centered Design, Don Norman talks about taxonomies and taskonomies (a very nice expression, in my opinion). He is absolutely right when he states that “many of the designs being produced by the HCD community are far too logical. They follow the hardware store approach to classification. This organization is well-suited for well-structured retrieval, but ill-suited for the direct support of an activity.” [This of course not only holds true for the HCD community, it's the same in the elearning community!] “Taxonomic structures are appropriate when there is no context, when suddenly needing some new piece of information or tool. That’s why this structure works well for libraries, stores, websites, and the program menu of an operating system. But once an activity has begun, then taskonomy is the way to go, where things used together are placed near one another, where any one item might be located logically within the taxonomic structure but also wherever behaviorally appropriate for the activities being supported.”

via elearningpost

Simplicity Matters.

June 1st, 2006 by Martin

Reuters reports about the results of an interesting study here: Complexity causes 50% of product returns.

[...]Half of all malfunctioning products returned to stores by consumers are in full working order, but customers can’t figure out how to operate the devices[...]
[...]The average consumer in the United States will struggle for 20 minutes to get a device working, before giving up, the study found[...]

Surely this is also a topic for eLearning systems: Systems offering many possibilities to adapt to personal needs (a one-size-fits-all solution is not acceptable) almost inevitably become very complex and hard to use, and a user often needs to put more emphasis on learning how to use such a system properly instead of concentrating on his real purpose. So we need adaptive eLearning systems :-)

via elearningpost