<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Analysis of coordinating activities in Collaborative Working Environments</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Muhammad Muneeb Kiani</string-name>
          <email>Muhammad.kiani@unimi.it</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Abdul Rafay Awan</string-name>
          <email>abdul.rafay@teradata.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>University of Milan</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>Milan Italy, Teradata, Islamabad</addr-line>
          <country country="PK">Pakistan</country>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <fpage>120</fpage>
      <lpage>124</lpage>
      <abstract>
        <p>Collaborative Working Environments (CWE) are widely used for effective collaboration among users. A CWE includes various tools and methodologies to support analysis of coordinating activities. Users within a CWE widely utilize textual means of collaboration and communication. An effective analysis of this textual collaboration can help in improving overall quality of collaborating activities and monitoring of the CWE. In textual analysis text is analyzed within certain context. Existing semi-automated techniques which are based on lexical, syntactic, semantic and other analysis approaches can be utilized with addition of customized automated classifier to cater needs of analyzing coordinating activities in collaborative working within a specific context. In proposed framework, natural language processing, opinion mining, lexicon based approaches will serve as processors of the framework.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>Text Analysis</kwd>
        <kwd>Collaborative Working Environments</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>-</title>
      <p>Advancements in technology made possible interactive communication with
computer systems and among other users. Further down the road with the help of these new
technologies paradigm of collaborative working emerged. Set of tools that supports
notion of collaborative working are known as Collaborative Working Environment
(CWE) [1]. Part of coordinating activities in collaborative working environment
includes textual communication. Though there are various techniques available for
monitoring collaborative working but monitoring textual communication is still a
complex task.</p>
      <p>NLP (Natural Language Processing) can offer relevant support for the automatic
classification of actions. In recent years researchers developed various mechanisms
and algorithms for analyzing text. The term text analysis refers to the tasks that are
performed to interpolate the facts and figures to augment the decision making and
predicting future trends. There are two categories of text analysis; first category is the
analysis of structured data that is performed on the data warehouse of an organization
to find out different statistics of a business whereas the second category is the analysis
of unstructured data i.e. web logs, audios, videos, etc. to predict the market trend and
what are the reasons for the failure of a particular product etc.</p>
      <p>Text analysis techniques can be useful in monitoring coordinative activities within
a CWE, understanding coordination among users in a given CWE and context can
greatly enhances overall effectiveness of the systems. Though textual analysis
techniques mentioned earlier are very mature, but they require further customization in
context of CWEs for an accurate analysis.</p>
      <p>In this paper a model is presented to analyze the collaboration within a certain
context by using existing text analysis techniques to augment the CWE.
2</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>Background</title>
      <p>The increasing degree of connectivity has given rise to the collaborative
environments. Governments and corporations have adapted to networked collaborative
environments to deliver their services. Managing the ever changing dynamics of
collaborative environments and putting in place effective monitoring processes has become
an important competency parameter. In order to determine the quality index of text
based collaborative environments use of NLP is the inherent choice. Lexicon based
techniques were used to analyze the activity model as proposed by the activity theory
to analyze and identify the cognitive advantages of joint activity [2].</p>
      <p>As mentioned earlier in section 1, CWE utilizes textual communication means for
coordinating activities. These activities are performed with the help of rich text
editors, group chat messages, emails and other means. This involves a lot of textual data,
and effective understanding and monitoring of this data can greatly help in improving
systems and overall activities from various aspects. Textual analysis is one way to
understand this information. Following is small brief of various textual analysis
methods.</p>
      <p>Some research work has been done in other languages for word sense
disambiguation [3]. Basing on the work of WordNet, Esuli and Sebastiani introduced another
library named as SentiWordNet for the purpose of opinion mining. SentiWordNet
utilize lexical basis of WordNet and assign certain value to different words in terms of
positivity, negativity and neutrality which as result help in determining overall mood
of a textual data [4].
3</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>Need for Analysis of coordinating actives in CWE</title>
      <p>Lyk et al explained role of monitoring in a CWE in various stages [5]. Great deal of
work has been done and various open source libraries of text mining, classifying and
analyzing text have been made available in recent years. Opinion mining or sentiment
analysis determines overall mood of the textual data focusing on particular set of
activities within a data set [6]. Isabella et al. analyzed coordinating activities against a
predefined set of parameters [7]. But classification of individual items has been done
manually without a particular rule set so it is not possible to scale up or use this
approach in similar scenarios. Secondly slicing of text has been done based on time
stamp and later rectified manually with human intervention which is another bottle
neck in this approach.</p>
      <p>There is a need to better understand set of activities within context of a collaborative
working environment which involves overall goal of collaboration such as
brainstorming, surveys, coordinating activities, number of participant, timing etc. In order
to analyze coordinating activities in a CWE exiting text analysis techniques can be
utilize.
4</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>Proposed methodology</title>
      <p>In proposed methodology coordinating activities of users will be recorded. For this
purpose Innovation Factory [8] CWE will be used as it provides event logs of the
coordination. Various textual analysis techniques will be tested and one that fits best
for the purpose will be adopted. [7] Manually labeled a set of coordinating activities
as shown in the Table 1. This data along with manually labeled data from further
experiments will be used to evaluate the output of analysis.</p>
      <sec id="sec-4-1">
        <title>Type</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-2">
        <title>Originator</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-3">
        <title>Text Token</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-4-4">
        <title>Unit</title>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-1">
          <title>GroupChat</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-2">
          <title>GroupChat</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-3">
          <title>GroupChat</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-4">
          <title>Text</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-5">
          <title>Poll Question</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-6">
          <title>Poll Vote</title>
          <p>Samo Rumez
where are you all?</p>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-7">
          <title>Situation Request</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-8">
          <title>Samo Rumez no, i think Vesna is eating</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-9">
          <title>Vesna Paulic ok guys lets start</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-10">
          <title>Nikolaj Potocnik we can open all tv channels for one week before</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-11">
          <title>Primoz Klasinc</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-12">
          <title>Nikolaj PotoÄnik</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-13">
          <title>Campaign should be about</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-14">
          <title>Standalone Mobia</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-15">
          <title>Situation Update</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-16">
          <title>Plan Propose</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-17">
          <title>Lay outing</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-18">
          <title>Information/knowledge Request</title>
        </sec>
        <sec id="sec-4-4-19">
          <title>Information/knowledge Provision</title>
          <p>Architecture of proposed methodology comprises of three main sections, input,
output and processor as depicted Fig.1 Input section provides Information about
Classes; currently we have assumed four collaborating classes that are Query (sub
class counter query), Opinion, Agreement, Argument (sub class counter argument).
More classes can be elicited depending upon the context such as classes defined by
[7] includes (idea) generation, agreement, disagreement, neutral and coordination.
Second input includes raw data set which should also include other value added
information for comprehensive analysis such as timestamps, number of users, their
input text, overall topics of discussions. Third and last input is set of quality metrics
which helps analysis to assign weight to various activities based on type of context for
example quality metrics will be different in case of a brainstorming, group discussion
session than that of a question answer session or survey.
Second section includes tokenization rule engine which determine how text should be
sliced for analysis purposes, it necessary to correctly tokenize set of text for correct
semantic linking. Tokenizing for finding queries is easy but finding other elements is
complex set. Determining a generic rule engine requires extensive evaluation in
various settings.</p>
          <p>As discussed earlier rule of classifier is to link tokenized text for creating meaningful
information, in case of coordinating activities larger set of text are required to be
classified to correctly determine their relevant classes. There are various libraries
available which provides support text analysis such as dandelion which can be used for
analysis [8]. Dandelion analyzes text with respect to context and also provides API
for further customization and allows extraction of various kind of information. Last
component of processer comprises of various environment variable such as time
stamps, user participation, topic of discussion and related these variables with textual
information in order to determining overall quality of entire activity.</p>
          <p>Output section is set of reports which are produced after processing raw data and
contextual information.
Proposed methodology provides basis for developing a comprehensive framework
and tool support for CWE. For the labeling of data, crowdsourcing tool will be
developed. Results will be evaluated to mitigate the under-fitting or over-fitting of
classifiers that can create false positives. Once the classifier is trained and tested against the
raw data, in the third step it will be incorporated in a CWE such as Innovation Factory
[8] analysis and monitoring framework.
1.</p>
        </sec>
      </sec>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Georgia</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Gregoris</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Review and functional classification of collaborative systems</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Information Management</source>
          <volume>22</volume>
          (
          <issue>4</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>281</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>305</lpage>
          (
          <year>2002</year>
          ) Barros,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Verdejo</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>M.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Analysing student interaction processes in order to improve collaboration. The DEGREE approach</article-title>
          .
          <source>International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education</source>
          <volume>11</volume>
          (
          <issue>3</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>221</fpage>
          --
          <lpage>241</lpage>
          (
          <year>2000</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Jianyong</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>D.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yao</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Xia</surname>
          </string-name>
          , l.:
          <article-title>Attribute knowledge mining for Chinese word sense disambiguation</article-title>
          .
          <source>In : International Conference on Asian Language Processing (IALP)</source>
          , Suzhou, pp.
          <fpage>33</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>77</lpage>
          (
          <year>2015</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Andrea</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fabrizio</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.:</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <article-title>SENTIWORDNET: A Publicly Available Lexical Resource</article-title>
          .
          <source>In : Language Resources and Evaluation</source>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>LREC</surname>
          </string-name>
          <year>2006</year>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>GENOA</surname>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2006</year>
          ) Harshada,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Michael</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>P.</surname>
          </string-name>
          , John, R. .:
          <article-title>Factors of collaborative working: A framework for a collaboration model</article-title>
          .
          <source>Applied Ergonomics</source>
          <volume>43</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>26</lpage>
          (
          <year>2012</year>
          ) Pang,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Lillian</surname>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>L.</surname>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Opinion mining and sentiment analysis</article-title>
          .
          <source>Foundations and trends in information retrieval 2</source>
          (
          <issue>1-2</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>1</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>135</lpage>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Isabella</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ronald</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Paolo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Fulvio</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Tracing the development of ideas in distributed, IT-Supported teams during synchronous collaboration</article-title>
          .
          <source>In : ECIS</source>
          <year>2014</year>
          (
          <year>2014</year>
          )
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Bellandi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ceravolo</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Damiani</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Frati</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>F.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Maggesi</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Zhu</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          :
          <article-title>Exploiting Participatory Design in Open Innovation Factories</article-title>
          . In : Eighth International Conference on Signal
          <source>Image Technology and Internet Based Systems (SITIS)</source>
          , pp.
          <fpage>937</fpage>
          --
          <lpage>943</lpage>
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>