An Improved Conversational Participative Sessions Based Inter Disciplinary Research Publication Model for Societal Applications

Vinod Kumar Verma^*

Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering and Technology, Deemed University, Longowal, Sangrur, India

Abstract

The integrity and authenticity are the two major objectives behind any research publication. In this paper, we pinpointed the real issues affecting the publication process in the global research community. Two strategies were considered namely: (i) Direct publication, (ii) publication after conversational sessions. Moreover, we have highlighted the influence of conversational session's over the publication process. Finally, the results obtained from our discussion reveals that conversational session plays a pivotal role in overall publication process.

Keywords

Research, Inter-Discipline, Publication, Model, Society

Received: April 8, 2015
Accepted: May 3, 2015
Published online: June 3, 2015

@ 2015 The Authors. Published by American Institute of Science. This Open Access article is under the CC BY-NC license. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

1. Introduction

A lots of research work is going in the field of publication processes in order to identify the integrity and spontaneity of the articles nowadays. Some of the major efforts in these directions are as follows. Marlowe et al. [1] proposed a unified model to integrate knowledge at different platform through data flow framework properties. Stoyenko et al. [2] suggested polynomial time program transformation and schedulability analysis of real time program with resource confection. Masticola et al. [3] identified multisource data flow problems in context of languages and systems. Miller et al. [4] suggested a combined approach to integrate two different fields as knowledge integration and market expansion. This approach includes double movement within modernity, socio-economic models and societal complexities. Roger et al. [5] reported an evaluation over intermediation design and socio economics as an unfinished revolution. Rountev et al. [6] evaluated inter-procedural dataflow analysis in context of large libraries for lecture notes. A proposal for high level component interfaces for collaborative development was proposed by Marlowe et al. [7]. Classification of collaborative knowledge to evaluate participative sessions was reported by Marlowe et al. [8]. Concept of complex modelling within the social sciences and from interdisciplinary evolution for historical and current state of art was proposed by Miller et al. [9]. Richard Saul Wurman [10] proved that conversation format of conferences can begin with open questions.

Author may think that to begin a conversational session need aspects like a panel, video presentation or a reading. Further, the discussions will lead to some creational framework resulting in a societal service. We focused on conversational participative sessions and their linkage to societal services in our proposal.

Following in the paper, Section 2 reports the goals of conversational participative sessions. Section 3 introduces the proposed publication evaluation model framework for our evaluation. The primary results of investigations based on conversational sessions are presented in section 4. Finally, in Section 5, we concluded with the influence of conversational participative sessions over publication process.

2. Goals of Conversational Sessions

Modern organizations in the society are facing diverse challenges of bringing interdisciplinary collaboration to real life problems. Conversation participative sessions can be one of the solutions to address these organizational challenges. Conversational participative sessions are different in numerous aspects as compare to the conventional conferences. In the conventional conferences, publications are being done using two methods namely: poster presentation and oral presentation. Conversational format of publication is centred on the real life society problems. The problems in conversational format are addressed by a group or a team which is quite different from conventional format of publication. In conventional format of publications, a paper based approach is used to provide the solution or answer of a given problem addressed by an individual. These problems serve as input for conventional as well as conversational format of conferences. The output of the conventional format is knowledge or information extraction by an individual whereas in case of conversational format of conferences, the output becomes knowledge sharing, views, ideas, strategies, reflections and opinions in multi-directions by the group. We gathered information from multi-sources in conversational sources due to involvement of group in overall knowledge extraction. The flow of information remains basically unidirectional in case of conventional conferences and multi-directional for conversational conferences. Conventional conferences follows linear format as one author is presenting his research after another. Conversational participative sessions stick towards serial or parallel format. In later case, there remain multiple short presentations followed by the short discussion in order to extract more precise solution to the given problems. There is low level feedback mechanism involve in conventional format of conferences because small time is being devoted for questions and answers. In case of conversational conferences, there is high level of feedback mechanism involved and probability of healthy interaction is more as compare to conventional one. It is due to highly interactive environment along with the feed forward strategy involved in later type of conference format. In conventional type conferences, papers are presented in a formal environment and informal interaction is very limited i.e. for some small tea breaks etc. In conversational participative sessions, there remains more informal sharing of information and ideas due to common group discussion. Even though there always remain more probability of occurrence of ideas and reflections in a group rather than an individual viewpoint. The scope of creativity is restricted in case of conventional conferences as this activity is being done before the starting of the sessions. The scope of creativity is not restricted in case of conversational participative session because it has been done before the sessions, during the session and after the sessions ending even during short breaks too. The orders of presentations are usually fixed in case of conventional conferences whereas in case of conversational participative sessions, it follows a rule based approach. In rule based approach, there is more flexibility as not only the planned appears are presented but also these papers are being discussed and further feed being is being given in a simultaneous manner. Systematic approach is being followed in case of conventional format of conferences whereas in case of conversational conferences systemic approach is being adhered. The implicit general objective lies with conventional format of conferences focused on efficient knowledge and information communication. In case of conversational format, the objective is oriented towards the effectiveness in the information communication, ideas sharing, reflection, problems solutions, questions answers and achieving some more efferent design for the designated problems. The resultant in the conventional format of conferences lies in the summations of the all of its parts or even sometime less than that. On the other side, in case of conversational participative sessions the resultant is always more than the summations of all of its parts. It is more synergetic as compare to its convention counterpart. The guiding metaphor is mechanism in case of conventional conferences and organism in case of conversational participative sessions.  As far as research methodology is concerned for conventional conferences, it follows mostly epistemic approach like reductionism and policism for problem solutions. With theses problem, we further derive new sub problem to narrow the scope of initial problem. Not only these conversational formats help me solving a bigger problem, but also it takes us near to the real time solutions for the said problems.  The conventional conferences or meeting usually provides vague solution to our problems. The output of conventional format of conferences focused towards reduced knowledge or information communication. These results take the output of problem domain in unique direction as one of the common types is paper presentation. On the other hand, the outputs of conversational participative session are focused on issues like creation and synthesis. The main objectives of conversational participative session are to lay on open platform to identify factors for interdisciplinary communication and knowledge transmission to the society. These sessions bridges the ethical hurdle associated with direction publishing process. Through interaction with group of other research community fellows surely open a new door for research not only for an individual but also for the entire research community. This makes the research publication of an individual more authentic and integrated. Conversational sessions are the summations of communication credibility, emotions, motivations, knowledge sharing and logics. The problems are being addressed with the help of general and technical language in these sessions making them more effective and efficient. These sessions are meant to achieve academic integration and synergistically club both the ends of society namely: public and private bodies.

3. Proposed Publication Model

We have proposed the following publication model to incorporate integrity and authenticity in publication process as shown in figure 1. This model is surely an enhanced version of conventional publication process. Our proposed model is bit complex than the direct publication model but it gives more reliability in the entire publication process. Already, we have discussed in section 2 that there are two major format of publication namely: conventional publication and publication through conversational participative sessions. Both of these types of publication processes are different in their goals. One focused on knowledge reduction and later focused on creation and new innovations. From one viewpoint, these are seeming quite opposite with each other. But surely the goal of these is not to create any contraction with each other.  We discovered that the actual goal of conventional conferences was creation only, whereas in case of conversational sessions the goal becomes summation of individual creation and group creation (i.e. synthesis) both. We analyzed that both the type of formats are beneficial for societal applications. Later type of conference format is more beneficial than conventional for societal applications. As in case of conversation participative sessions, more effectiveness and ethics have been incorporated. There always remains less probability of false publication in conversation participative sessions as the participants himself or herself presenting the whole paper with its contribution to the society. We actually need a hybrid approach for research publication which combines merits of both the type of conference publication i.e. conventional and conversational. The hybrid approach will use both the publication format in synergic relationship which simultaneously deploys cybernetic loops of positive and negative type to analyze feedbacks and feed forward policies.

Next section highlight our results from the above said models evaluation.

4. Results and Discussions

Conversational participative sessions have gained considerable significance in the present scenarios. The major emphasis of these sessions is to support and encourage the global community for setting up an open platform. These sessions effectively summarize the means to achieve academic integration and invented feasible ways to intermingle different activities in various parts of society at large. We observed that the reflections of the discussions focus on inter disciplinary communications, transforming knowledge to the society and academic ethos, pathos and logos. This seems a good agreement with the results reported in reference [9]. As far as the interdisciplinary field’s linkage is concerned, the problem domain with diverse stakeholders requires better knowledge and expertise. To effectively address an interdisciplinary problem, the issues like openness, teamwork and spontaneity should be given due consideration. Even though, all the real time problems can only be solved by integrating various aspects from different fields. A single field or branch of study or research is not self sufficient to achieve the required goal. There is a dire need to probe into the area of interdisciplinary communication in order to achieve more collaborative and better product. We enhanced the work reported by Karl. h. Mullar [9]. We evaluated that the conversational interdisciplinary sessions are providing communities with a direction to create tomorrow’s professional with improved edge over knowledge, learning and practices. More we are concentrating over interdisciplinary collaboration, better are the chances for newer approach integrating spontaneity, serendipity, community formation and emergence. These concepts definitely improve community building time and remove potential barriers like personal, psychological and culture from the same. Even though, federal agencies are seeking more innovative means to enhance organizational efficiency. The solution to the diverse challenges of modern industry can only be addressed by utilizing the potential of interdisciplinary collaboration. Community needs some change in a more rigorous manner that their leaders have already set through strategic visions, experimentation and prototyping. The intent is to have a box of interdisciplinary resources to meet our objectives in more efficient manner than earlier fashion. Several approaches have been designed and implemented to foster open innovative challenges of real time environments. Competitions and presentations can be two of the approaches that federal agencies can use to solve their mission centric problems. Smarter planet initiative predecessor of autonomic computing is one of the best examples of interdisciplinary collaboration and integration by IBM Corporation in the said direction. Because of the more versatile nature of the world in terms of instruments and devices, the need to integrate the vast amount of data, services and infrastructure has becomes equally important criterion for the overall system success. Conversational participative sessions aim should not only to develop a base of knowledge and judgement, but also to inculcate minds perspectives to discovery and collaboration. Moreover, action research results in generalizable knowledge through process improvement and seems meaningful for our community.

Figure 1. Research Society Service Publication Model.

5. Conclusions

Collaborative relationships among researchers and the individual enhance the scope of research irrespective of their area of expertise. The use of supercomputer across the globe laid the foundation for a new paradigm in the interdisciplinary field's collaboration ranging from computational biology to data enabled social services. Adequate and effective communication among the multidisciplinary research area becomes a severe problem now a day. The factors like different research areas thinking, nation's cultural background etc. are responsible for the same. A cross cultural study or training program can surely overcome such a problem of the multi- disciplinary research domain.

In this reflection, I assessed the viewpoints, perspectives and aspects for interdisciplinary integration along with its benefits to the individual and communities.

References

1. T. J. Marlowe, B.G. Ryder. Properties of data flow networks: A unified model. Acta Informatica.28 (2), 121-164, 1991.
2. D. Stoynko, T. J. Marlowe. Polynomial time program transformations and schedulability analysis of parallel real time program with restricted resource contention. Journal of real Time Systems, 4(4), 1992.
3. S. P. Masticola, T. J. Marlowe, B.G. Ryder. Multisource data flow problems. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems. 17(5). 777-803, September 1995.
4. Karl. h. Mullar. Double Movements within Modernity, Frankfurt: Campus-Verlag 1999.
5. J. Rogers, Hollingsworth, Karl. H. Mullar and Ellen Jane Hollingsworth. Advancing Socio-Economics. 2002.
6. Rountev, S. Kagan, T. J. Marlowe. Inter-procedural data flow analysis in presence of large libraries. Proceedings of CC 2006, 216, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3923, 2006.
7. T. J. Marlowe, V. Kirova. High level component interfaces for collaborative development: A proposal. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics. 7(6), 1-6, 2009.
8. T. J. Marlowe, N. Jastroch, V. Kirova, M. Mohtashmi. A classification of collaborative knowledge. Special Session on Collaborative Knowledge Management. Workshop on Knowledge generation Communication and Management (KGCM 2010). June 2010.
9. Karl. h. Mullar. The new science of cybernetics. The evolution of living research design. Vol. II. Theory. Wien: Edition echoraum 2011.
10. Ricad Saul Wurman. What are conferences for? Harward Business Review, June 2010, p26.