On Formalization and Representation in Collaborative Research

The aim of this chapter is to delve into the issues related to the formalization and transmission of knowledge within the scope of collaborative scientific research and to propose a new approach to address such difficulties. Analyzing methods and practices of collaborative research, the authors highlight that observation and reasoning are systematically prone to flaws, so that theorization is made highly conjectural. To gain reliability, points of views and visions need then a support from a community; in other words, they become public. To allow convergence to take place, conceptualizations need to be understood by people with possibly different cognitive models. Therefore, the authors propose using artifacts that can be strongly structured in individual use while weakly structured in common use. These artifacts take place generally as graphic representations, and as in the case of the arts, they can be realistic or abstract, they can emphasize, hide, or allow different, contrasting and concurrent interpretations of the exposed knowledge.

[1]  James R. Cochrane,et al.  'Fire from Above, Fire from Below': Health, Justice and the Persistence of the Sacred , 2008 .

[2]  P. David,et al.  The economics of gateway technology and network evolution: lessons from electricity supply history , 1988 .

[3]  Craig Callender,et al.  There Is No Special Problem About Scientific Representation , 2006, THEORIA.

[4]  Shah Ebrahim,et al.  Commentary: the hormone replacement-coronary heart disease conundrum: is this the death of observational epidemiology? , 2004, International journal of epidemiology.

[5]  Jordi Sorribas,et al.  Bridging semantically different paradigms in the field of marine acquisition event logging , 2015, Earth Science Informatics.

[6]  Paolo Diviacco,et al.  An open source, web based, simple solution for seismic data dissemination and collaborative research , 2005, Comput. Geosci..

[7]  Paolo Diviacco,et al.  Reconciling Knowledge and Collaborative E-Research , 2015 .

[8]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[9]  Umberto Eco Guessing: from Aristotle to Sherlock Holmes , 1981 .

[10]  Dmitry Mouromtsev,et al.  Organization of a geophysical information space by using an event-bush-based collaborative tool , 2015, Earth Science Informatics.

[11]  Paolo Diviacco,et al.  Concept-referenced spaces in Computer-supported Collaborative Work , 2010 .

[12]  Dmitry Mouromtsev,et al.  Grammar of Dynamic Knowledge for Collaborative Knowledge Engineering and Representation , 2015 .

[13]  Paolo Diviacco,et al.  Maps, Graphs, and Annotations as Boundary Objects in Knowledge Networks, Distributed Cognition, and Collaborative E-Research , 2015 .

[14]  I. Lakatos,et al.  Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1970 .

[15]  M. Bishop Theory-Ladenness of Perception Arguments , 1992, PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association.

[16]  C. Pshenichny Classical logic and the problem of uncertainty , 2004, Geological Society, London, Special Publications.

[17]  Luke Georghiou,et al.  Global cooperation in research , 1998 .