Search

本稿は、2011年1月発行の学士会会報に掲載された記事をベースに若干手を加えたものです

組織の分散化や人材の流動化が進む中,ネットワークを介した知識の形成・蓄積,共有,提供・利用を支援するコミュニティ知識ベース環境の実現が求められている.このような環境においては,コミュニティ知識ベースは実務を通して漸次的に構築されるべきであり,「質の高い」知識を蓄積し,その知識をより「有効に」他者と共有し利用することができるような枠組みの提供が必要である.我々は,システムエンジニア(SE)を支援するための,質問と回答との対を知識として蓄積したデータベースを対象に,知識の形成と蓄積,提供と利用という2つの観点から調査分析を実施した.この調査より,(1)質の高い知識が形成されるためには質問がその質問内容に応じた構造的特性を持つべきであること,(2)提供および利用において「役に立つ」と認識される知識は,形成・蓄積時においても「質が高い」と認識されていた場合が多いこと,および,(3)「要求していた」知識を知識ベースから検索するためには(1)で見られる質問内容ごとの構造的特性の利用が有効であること,の3点を分析結果として得た.本稿では,以上の調査についての詳細を報告するとともに,知識の形成・蓄積,共有,提供・利用を支援するコミュニティ知識ベース環境の構築へ向けての指針についてこれらの知見を基に論じる.

Second International Workshopon Cooperative Buildings: Integrating Information, Organizations and Architecture (CoBuild’99), A work environment needs to be designed based on the nature and characteristics of the work activities and the work styles. Unless we have a clear understanding of what factors of work activities and styles depend on what factors of work environments and vice versa, we would not be able to modify or add components of work environments “effectively.” This paper first presents our framework to measure work factors of work activities, styles and an environment, and then discusses results of our case study of applying the framework to actual work practice at NTT Data Corporation. Our framework consists of three representational models: the KPM (Knowledge Production Model) for representing work activities, the MS-GI (Mobile-Settled, Group-Individual) model for characterizing work styles, and the SOU (System-Office-Usage) model for representing a work environment. We have conducted a survey on 274 workers at an organizational unit of NTT Data Corporation by applying the three models. The result shows that the framework is successfully applied to understand the relationships among the three work factors at least partially if not completely. The paper concludes with a discussion of how the framework can be used to evolve work environments by taking into account work activities and styles.

Our research on knowledge management is rooted in the community perspective. We believe that knowledge systems should serve primarily to help people create and share new knowledge. But we also acknowledge the role of stable, structured and reliable information, both as a component of our systems and as a component of the organizations within which we work. The contribution of the paper is a framework for integrating organizational and community perspectives on knowledge management and its computational support. Our basic idea is that knowledge is not a static chunk of information, but rather, knowledge evolves in a cycle of knowledge liquidization and crystallization. The evolving process takes place through the interactions among conceptual worlds, representational worlds, and the real world. This paper first describes the knowledge liquidization and crystallization framework. We then illustrate the approach with three systems, Knowledge Nebula Crystallizer, livingOM, and ART-SHTA.

Hearers get at the intended meaning of uncooperative utterances (i.e. utterances that conflict with the prescriptions laid down by the Gricean maxims) by pragmatically deriving sentences that reconcile these utterances with the maxims. Such pragmatic derivations are made according to pragmatic rules called implicatures. As they are pragmatic in nature, the conclusions drawn by applying implicatures remain uncertain. In other words, they may have to be withdrawn in view of further information. Because of this last feature, Levinson argued that implicatures should be formally modeled as non–monotonic or default rules of inference. In this paper, I will do exactly this: by relying on the Adaptive Logics Programme, I will provide a formal explication of implicatures as default inference rules. More specifically, I will do so for a particular kind of implicatures, viz scalar implicatures.

In this paper we present two kinds of procedural semantics for privative modification. We do this for three reasons. The first reason is to launch a tough test case to gauge the degree of substantial agreement between a constructivist and a realist interpretation of procedural semantics; the second is to extend Martin-L ̈f’s Constructive Type Theory to privative modification, which is characteristic of natural language; the third reason is to sketch a positive characterization of privation.