`Electronic Publishing' -- Practice and Experience

Electronic Publishing -- Origination, Dissemination and Design (EP-odd) is an academic journal which publishes refereed papers in the subject area of electronic publishing. The authors of the present paper are, respectively, editor-in-chief, system software consultant and senior production manager for the journal. EP-odd's policy is that editors, authors, referees and production staff will work closely together using electronic mail. Authors are also encouraged to originate their papers using one of the approved text-processing packages together with the appropriate set of macros which enforce the layout style for the journal. This same software will then be used by the publisher in the production phase. Our experiences with these strategies are presented, and two recently developed suites of software are described: one of these makes the macro sets available over electronic mail and the other automates the flow of papers through the refereeing process. The decision to produce EP-odd in this way means that the publisher has to adopt production procedures which differ markedly from those employed for a conventional journal.

Analysing Similarity in Exam Timetabling

In this paper we carry out an investigation of some of the major features of exam timetabling problems with a view to developing a similarity measure. This similarity measure will be used within a case-based reasoning (CBR) system to match a new problem with one from a case-based of previously solved problems. The case base will also store the heuristic for meta-heuristic techniques applied most successfully to each problem stored. The technique(s) stored with the matched case will be retrieved and applied to the new case. The CBR assumption in our system is that similar problems can be solved equally well by the same technique.

Knowledge discovery in hyper-heuristic using case-based reasoning on course timetabling

This paper presents a new hyper-heuristic method using Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) for solving course timetabling problems. The term Hyper-heuristics has recently been employed to refer to 'heuristics that choose heuristics' rather than heuristics that operate directly on given problems. One of the overriding motivations of hyper-heuristic methods is the attempt to develop techniques that can operate with greater generality than is currently possible. The basic idea behind this is that we maintain a case base of information about the most successful heuristics for a range of previous timetabling problems to predict the best heuristic for the new problem in hand using the previous knowledge. Knowledge discovery techniques are used to carry out the training on the CBR system to improve the system performance on the prediction. Initial results presented in this paper are good and we conclude by discussing the con-siderable promise for future work in this area.

Analysing Similarity in Exam Timetabling

In this paper we carry out an investigation of some of the major features of exam timetabling problems with a view to developing a similarity measure. This similarity measure will be used within a case-based reasoning (CBR) system to match a new problem with one from a case-based of previously solved problems. The case base will also store the heuristic for meta-heuristic techniques applied most successfully to each problem stored. The technique(s) stored with the matched case will be retrieved and applied to the new case. The CBR assumption in our system is that similar problems can be solved equally well by the same technique.

Public and user participation in public service delivery: tensions in policy and practice

Social-scientific analysis of public-participation initiatives has proliferated in recent years. This review article discusses some key aspects of recent work. Firstly, it analyses some of the justifications put forward for public participation, drawing attention to differences and overlaps between rationales premised on democratic representation/representativeness and those based on more technocratic ideas about the knowledge that the public can offer. Secondly, it considers certain tensions in policy discourses on participation, focusing in particular on policy relating to the National Health Service and other British public services. Thirdly, it examines the challenges of putting a coherent vision for public participation into practice, noting the impediments that derive from the often-competing ideas about the remit of participation held by different groups of stakeholders. Finally, it analyses the gap between policy and practice, and the consequences of this for the prospects for the enactment of active citizenship through participation initiatives.