The Experts below are selected from a list of 2532 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Lillian Lee - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
internet collaboration on extremely difficult problems research versus olympiad questions on the polymath site
The Web Conference, 2016Co-Authors: Isabel M. Kloumann, Chenhao Tan, Jon Kleinberg, Lillian LeeAbstract:Despite the existence of highly successful Internet collaborations on complex projects, including open-source software, little is known about how Internet collaborations work for solving "extremely" difficult problems, such as open-ended research questions. We quantitatively investigate a series of efforts known as the Polymath projects, which tackle mathematical research problems through open online discussion. A key analytical insight is that we can contrast the polymath projects with mini-Polymaths -- spinoffs that were conducted in the same manner as the Polymaths but aimed at addressing math Olympiad questions, which, while quite difficult, are known to be feasible. Our comparative analysis shifts between three elements of the projects: the roles and relationships of the authors, the temporal dynamics of how the projects evolved, and the linguistic properties of the discussions themselves. We find interesting differences between the two domains through each of these analyses, and present these analyses as a template to facilitate comparison between Polymath and other domains for collaboration and communication. We also develop models that have strong performance in distinguishing research-level comments based on any of our groups of features. Finally, we examine whether comments representing research breakthroughs can be recognized more effectively based on their intrinsic features, or by the (re-)actions of others, and find good predictive power in linguistic features.
-
WWW - Internet Collaboration on Extremely Difficult Problems: Research versus Olympiad Questions on the Polymath Site
Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web - WWW '16, 2016Co-Authors: Isabel M. Kloumann, Chenhao Tan, Jon Kleinberg, Lillian LeeAbstract:Despite the existence of highly successful Internet collaborations on complex projects, including open-source software, little is known about how Internet collaborations work for solving "extremely" difficult problems, such as open-ended research questions. We quantitatively investigate a series of efforts known as the Polymath projects, which tackle mathematical research problems through open online discussion. A key analytical insight is that we can contrast the polymath projects with mini-Polymaths -- spinoffs that were conducted in the same manner as the Polymaths but aimed at addressing math Olympiad questions, which, while quite difficult, are known to be feasible. Our comparative analysis shifts between three elements of the projects: the roles and relationships of the authors, the temporal dynamics of how the projects evolved, and the linguistic properties of the discussions themselves. We find interesting differences between the two domains through each of these analyses, and present these analyses as a template to facilitate comparison between Polymath and other domains for collaboration and communication. We also develop models that have strong performance in distinguishing research-level comments based on any of our groups of features. Finally, we examine whether comments representing research breakthroughs can be recognized more effectively based on their intrinsic features, or by the (re-)actions of others, and find good predictive power in linguistic features.
Michael A. Nielsen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Introduction To The Polymath Project and “Density Hales-Jewett and Moser Numbers”
Bolyai Society Mathematical Studies, 2010Co-Authors: Michael A. NielsenAbstract:At first appearance, the paper which follows this essay [7] appears to be a typical mathematical paper. It poses and partially answers several combinatorial questions, and follows the standard forms of mathematical discourse, with theorems, proofs, conjectures, and so on. Appearances are deceiving, however, for the paper has an unusual origin, a clue to which is in the name of the author, one D. H. J. Polymath. Behind this unusual name is a bold experiment in how mathematics is done. This experiment was initiated in January of 2009 by W. Timothy Gowers [5], and was an experiment in what Gowers termed “massively collaborative mathematics”. The idea, in brief, was to attempt to solve a mathematical research problem working entirely in the open, using Gowers’s blog as a medium for mathematical collaboration. The hope was that a large number of mathematicians would contribute, and that their collective intelligence would make easy work of what would ordinarily be a difficult problem. Gowers dubbed the project the “Polymath Project”. In this essay I describe how the Polymath Project proceeded, and reflect on similarities to online collaborations in the open source and open science communities. Although I followed the Polymath Project closely, my background is in theoretical physics, not combinatorics, and so I did not participate directly in the mathematical discussions. The perspective is that of an interested outsider, one whose main creative interests are in open science and collective intelligence.
-
Massively collaborative mathematics
Nature, 2009Co-Authors: Timothy Gowers, Michael A. NielsenAbstract:The 'Polymath Project' proved that many minds can work together to solve difficult mathematical problems. Timothy Gowers and Michael Nielsen reflect on the lessons learned for open-source science.
Isabel M. Kloumann - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
internet collaboration on extremely difficult problems research versus olympiad questions on the polymath site
The Web Conference, 2016Co-Authors: Isabel M. Kloumann, Chenhao Tan, Jon Kleinberg, Lillian LeeAbstract:Despite the existence of highly successful Internet collaborations on complex projects, including open-source software, little is known about how Internet collaborations work for solving "extremely" difficult problems, such as open-ended research questions. We quantitatively investigate a series of efforts known as the Polymath projects, which tackle mathematical research problems through open online discussion. A key analytical insight is that we can contrast the polymath projects with mini-Polymaths -- spinoffs that were conducted in the same manner as the Polymaths but aimed at addressing math Olympiad questions, which, while quite difficult, are known to be feasible. Our comparative analysis shifts between three elements of the projects: the roles and relationships of the authors, the temporal dynamics of how the projects evolved, and the linguistic properties of the discussions themselves. We find interesting differences between the two domains through each of these analyses, and present these analyses as a template to facilitate comparison between Polymath and other domains for collaboration and communication. We also develop models that have strong performance in distinguishing research-level comments based on any of our groups of features. Finally, we examine whether comments representing research breakthroughs can be recognized more effectively based on their intrinsic features, or by the (re-)actions of others, and find good predictive power in linguistic features.
-
WWW - Internet Collaboration on Extremely Difficult Problems: Research versus Olympiad Questions on the Polymath Site
Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web - WWW '16, 2016Co-Authors: Isabel M. Kloumann, Chenhao Tan, Jon Kleinberg, Lillian LeeAbstract:Despite the existence of highly successful Internet collaborations on complex projects, including open-source software, little is known about how Internet collaborations work for solving "extremely" difficult problems, such as open-ended research questions. We quantitatively investigate a series of efforts known as the Polymath projects, which tackle mathematical research problems through open online discussion. A key analytical insight is that we can contrast the polymath projects with mini-Polymaths -- spinoffs that were conducted in the same manner as the Polymaths but aimed at addressing math Olympiad questions, which, while quite difficult, are known to be feasible. Our comparative analysis shifts between three elements of the projects: the roles and relationships of the authors, the temporal dynamics of how the projects evolved, and the linguistic properties of the discussions themselves. We find interesting differences between the two domains through each of these analyses, and present these analyses as a template to facilitate comparison between Polymath and other domains for collaboration and communication. We also develop models that have strong performance in distinguishing research-level comments based on any of our groups of features. Finally, we examine whether comments representing research breakthroughs can be recognized more effectively based on their intrinsic features, or by the (re-)actions of others, and find good predictive power in linguistic features.
Chenhao Tan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
internet collaboration on extremely difficult problems research versus olympiad questions on the polymath site
The Web Conference, 2016Co-Authors: Isabel M. Kloumann, Chenhao Tan, Jon Kleinberg, Lillian LeeAbstract:Despite the existence of highly successful Internet collaborations on complex projects, including open-source software, little is known about how Internet collaborations work for solving "extremely" difficult problems, such as open-ended research questions. We quantitatively investigate a series of efforts known as the Polymath projects, which tackle mathematical research problems through open online discussion. A key analytical insight is that we can contrast the polymath projects with mini-Polymaths -- spinoffs that were conducted in the same manner as the Polymaths but aimed at addressing math Olympiad questions, which, while quite difficult, are known to be feasible. Our comparative analysis shifts between three elements of the projects: the roles and relationships of the authors, the temporal dynamics of how the projects evolved, and the linguistic properties of the discussions themselves. We find interesting differences between the two domains through each of these analyses, and present these analyses as a template to facilitate comparison between Polymath and other domains for collaboration and communication. We also develop models that have strong performance in distinguishing research-level comments based on any of our groups of features. Finally, we examine whether comments representing research breakthroughs can be recognized more effectively based on their intrinsic features, or by the (re-)actions of others, and find good predictive power in linguistic features.
-
WWW - Internet Collaboration on Extremely Difficult Problems: Research versus Olympiad Questions on the Polymath Site
Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web - WWW '16, 2016Co-Authors: Isabel M. Kloumann, Chenhao Tan, Jon Kleinberg, Lillian LeeAbstract:Despite the existence of highly successful Internet collaborations on complex projects, including open-source software, little is known about how Internet collaborations work for solving "extremely" difficult problems, such as open-ended research questions. We quantitatively investigate a series of efforts known as the Polymath projects, which tackle mathematical research problems through open online discussion. A key analytical insight is that we can contrast the polymath projects with mini-Polymaths -- spinoffs that were conducted in the same manner as the Polymaths but aimed at addressing math Olympiad questions, which, while quite difficult, are known to be feasible. Our comparative analysis shifts between three elements of the projects: the roles and relationships of the authors, the temporal dynamics of how the projects evolved, and the linguistic properties of the discussions themselves. We find interesting differences between the two domains through each of these analyses, and present these analyses as a template to facilitate comparison between Polymath and other domains for collaboration and communication. We also develop models that have strong performance in distinguishing research-level comments based on any of our groups of features. Finally, we examine whether comments representing research breakthroughs can be recognized more effectively based on their intrinsic features, or by the (re-)actions of others, and find good predictive power in linguistic features.
Jon Kleinberg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
internet collaboration on extremely difficult problems research versus olympiad questions on the polymath site
The Web Conference, 2016Co-Authors: Isabel M. Kloumann, Chenhao Tan, Jon Kleinberg, Lillian LeeAbstract:Despite the existence of highly successful Internet collaborations on complex projects, including open-source software, little is known about how Internet collaborations work for solving "extremely" difficult problems, such as open-ended research questions. We quantitatively investigate a series of efforts known as the Polymath projects, which tackle mathematical research problems through open online discussion. A key analytical insight is that we can contrast the polymath projects with mini-Polymaths -- spinoffs that were conducted in the same manner as the Polymaths but aimed at addressing math Olympiad questions, which, while quite difficult, are known to be feasible. Our comparative analysis shifts between three elements of the projects: the roles and relationships of the authors, the temporal dynamics of how the projects evolved, and the linguistic properties of the discussions themselves. We find interesting differences between the two domains through each of these analyses, and present these analyses as a template to facilitate comparison between Polymath and other domains for collaboration and communication. We also develop models that have strong performance in distinguishing research-level comments based on any of our groups of features. Finally, we examine whether comments representing research breakthroughs can be recognized more effectively based on their intrinsic features, or by the (re-)actions of others, and find good predictive power in linguistic features.
-
WWW - Internet Collaboration on Extremely Difficult Problems: Research versus Olympiad Questions on the Polymath Site
Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web - WWW '16, 2016Co-Authors: Isabel M. Kloumann, Chenhao Tan, Jon Kleinberg, Lillian LeeAbstract:Despite the existence of highly successful Internet collaborations on complex projects, including open-source software, little is known about how Internet collaborations work for solving "extremely" difficult problems, such as open-ended research questions. We quantitatively investigate a series of efforts known as the Polymath projects, which tackle mathematical research problems through open online discussion. A key analytical insight is that we can contrast the polymath projects with mini-Polymaths -- spinoffs that were conducted in the same manner as the Polymaths but aimed at addressing math Olympiad questions, which, while quite difficult, are known to be feasible. Our comparative analysis shifts between three elements of the projects: the roles and relationships of the authors, the temporal dynamics of how the projects evolved, and the linguistic properties of the discussions themselves. We find interesting differences between the two domains through each of these analyses, and present these analyses as a template to facilitate comparison between Polymath and other domains for collaboration and communication. We also develop models that have strong performance in distinguishing research-level comments based on any of our groups of features. Finally, we examine whether comments representing research breakthroughs can be recognized more effectively based on their intrinsic features, or by the (re-)actions of others, and find good predictive power in linguistic features.