Decision‐Making in Public Good Dilemmas: Theory and Agent‐Based Simulation

In many real world contexts individuals find themselves in situations where they have to decide between options of behaviour that serve a collective purpose or behaviours which satisfy one’s private interests, ignoring the collective. In some cases the underlying social dilemma (Dawes, 1980) is solved and we observe collective action (Olson, 1965). In others social mobilisation is unsuccessful. The central topic of social dilemma research is the identification and understanding of mechanisms which yield to the observed cooperation and therefore resolve the social dilemma. It is the purpose of this thesis to contribute this research field for the case of public good dilemmas. To do so, existing work that is relevant to this problem domain is reviewed and a set of mandatory requirements is derived which guide theory and method development of the thesis. In particular, the thesis focusses on dynamic processes of social mobilisation which can foster or inhibit collective action. The basic understanding is that success or failure of the required process of social mobilisation is determined by heterogeneous individual preferences of the members of a providing group, the social structure in which the acting individuals are contained, and the embedding of the individuals in economic, political, biophysical, or other external contexts. To account for these aspects and for the involved dynamics the methodical approach of the thesis is computer simulation, in particular agent-based modelling and simulation of social systems. Particularly conductive are agent models which ground the simulation of human behaviour in suitable psychological theories of action. The thesis develops the action theory HAPPenInGS (Heterogeneous Agents Providing Public Goods) and demonstrates its embedding into different agent-based simulations. The thesis substantiates the particular added value of the methodical approach: Starting out from a theory of individual behaviour, in simulations the emergence of collective patterns of behaviour becomes observable. In addition, the underlying collective dynamics may be scrutinised and assessed by scenario analysis. The results of such experiments reveal insights on processes of social mobilisation which go beyond classical empirical approaches and yield policy recommendations on promising intervention measures in particular.

Capturing Emergent Semantics from Social Annotation Systems

The ongoing growth of the World Wide Web, catalyzed by the increasing possibility of ubiquitous access via a variety of devices, continues to strengthen its role as our prevalent information and commmunication medium. However, although tools like search engines facilitate retrieval, the task of finally making sense of Web content is still often left to human interpretation. The vision of supporting both humans and machines in such knowledge-based activities led to the development of different systems which allow to structure Web resources by metadata annotations. Interestingly, two major approaches which gained a considerable amount of attention are addressing the problem from nearly opposite directions: On the one hand, the idea of the Semantic Web suggests to formalize the knowledge within a particular domain by means of the "top-down" approach of defining ontologies. On the other hand, Social Annotation Systems as part of the so-called Web 2.0 movement implement a "bottom-up" style of categorization using arbitrary keywords. Experience as well as research in the characteristics of both systems has shown that their strengths and weaknesses seem to be inverse: While Social Annotation suffers from problems like, e. g., ambiguity or lack or precision, ontologies were especially designed to eliminate those. On the contrary, the latter suffer from a knowledge acquisition bottleneck, which is successfully overcome by the large user populations of Social Annotation Systems. Instead of being regarded as competing paradigms, the obvious potential synergies from a combination of both motivated approaches to "bridge the gap" between them. These were fostered by the evidence of emergent semantics, i. e., the self-organized evolution of implicit conceptual structures, within Social Annotation data. While several techniques to exploit the emergent patterns were proposed, a systematic analysis - especially regarding paradigms from the field of ontology learning - is still largely missing. This also includes a deeper understanding of the circumstances which affect the evolution processes. This work aims to address this gap by providing an in-depth study of methods and influencing factors to capture emergent semantics from Social Annotation Systems. We focus hereby on the acquisition of lexical semantics from the underlying networks of keywords, users and resources. Structured along different ontology learning tasks, we use a methodology of semantic grounding to characterize and evaluate the semantic relations captured by different methods. In all cases, our studies are based on datasets from several Social Annotation Systems. Specifically, we first analyze semantic relatedness among keywords, and identify measures which detect different notions of relatedness. These constitute the input of concept learning algorithms, which focus then on the discovery of synonymous and ambiguous keywords. Hereby, we assess the usefulness of various clustering techniques. As a prerequisite to induce hierarchical relationships, our next step is to study measures which quantify the level of generality of a particular keyword. We find that comparatively simple measures can approximate the generality information encoded in reference taxonomies. These insights are used to inform the final task, namely the creation of concept hierarchies. For this purpose, generality-based algorithms exhibit advantages compared to clustering approaches. In order to complement the identification of suitable methods to capture semantic structures, we analyze as a next step several factors which influence their emergence. Empirical evidence is provided that the amount of available data plays a crucial role for determining keyword meanings. From a different perspective, we examine pragmatic aspects by considering different annotation patterns among users. Based on a broad distinction between "categorizers" and "describers", we find that the latter produce more accurate results. This suggests a causal link between pragmatic and semantic aspects of keyword annotation. As a special kind of usage pattern, we then have a look at system abuse and spam. While observing a mixed picture, we suggest that an individual decision should be taken instead of disregarding spammers as a matter of principle. Finally, we discuss a set of applications which operationalize the results of our studies for enhancing both Social Annotation and semantic systems. These comprise on the one hand tools which foster the emergence of semantics, and on the one hand applications which exploit the socially induced relations to improve, e. g., searching, browsing, or user profiling facilities. In summary, the contributions of this work highlight viable methods and crucial aspects for designing enhanced knowledge-based services of a Social Semantic Web.