Hardware and software in smart decision rooms

Since the last decade research in Group Decision Making area have been focus in the building of meeting rooms that could support the decision making task and improve the quality of those decisions. However the emergence of Ambient Intelligence concept contributes with a new perspective, a different way of viewing traditional decision rooms. In this paper we will present an overview of Smart Decision Rooms providing Intelligence to the meeting environment, and we will also present LAID, an Ambient Intelligence Environment oriented to support Group Decision Making and some of the software tools that we already have installed in this environment.

Personality, emotion, and mood in agent-based group decision making

Group decision making plays an important role in organizations, especially in the present-day economy that demands high-quality, yet quick decisions. Group decision-support systems (GDSSs) are interactive computer-based environments that support concerted, coordinated team efforts toward the completion of joint tasks. The need for collaborative work in organizations has led to the development of a set of general collaborative computer-supported technologies and specific GDSSs that support distributed groups (in time and space) in various domains. However, each person is unique and has different reactions to various arguments. Many times a disagreement arises because of the way we began arguing, not because of the content itself. Nevertheless, emotion, mood, and personality factors have not yet been addressed in GDSSs, despite how strongly they influence results. Our group’s previous work considered the roles that emotion and mood play in decision making. In this article, we reformulate these factors and include personality as well. Thus, this work incorporates personality, emotion, and mood in the negotiation process of an argumentbased group decision-making process. Our main goal in this work is to improve the negotiation process through argumentation using the affective characteristics of the involved participants. Each participant agent represents a group decision member. This representation lets us simulate people with different personalities. The discussion process between group members (agents) is made through the exchange of persuasive arguments. Although our multiagent architecture model4 includes two types of agents—the facilitator and the participant— this article focuses on the emotional, personality, and argumentation components of the participant agent.

Context-aware emotion-based model for group decision making

Involving groups in important management processes such as decision making has several advantages. By discussing and combining ideas, counter ideas, critical opinions, identified constraints, and alternatives, a group of individuals can test potentially better solutions, sometimes in the form of new products, services, and plans. In the past few decades, operations research, AI, and computer science have had tremendous success creating software systems that can achieve optimal solutions, even for complex problems. The only drawback is that people don’t always agree with these solutions. Sometimes this dissatisfaction is due to an incorrect parameterization of the problem. Nevertheless, the reasons people don’t like a solution might not be quantifiable, because those reasons are often based on aspects such as emotion, mood, and personality. At the same time, monolithic individual decisionsupport systems centered on optimizing solutions are being replaced by collaborative systems and group decision-support systems (GDSSs) that focus more on establishing connections between people in organizations. These systems follow a kind of social paradigm. Combining both optimization- and socialcentered approaches is a topic of current research. However, even if such a hybrid approach can be developed, it will still miss an essential point: the emotional nature of group participants in decision-making tasks. We’ve developed a context-aware emotion based model to design intelligent agents for group decision-making processes. To evaluate this model, we’ve incorporated it in an agent-based simulator called ABS4GD (Agent-Based Simulation for Group Decision), which we developed. This multiagent simulator considers emotion- and argument based factors while supporting group decision-making processes. Experiments show that agents endowed with emotional awareness achieve agreements more quickly than those without such awareness. Hence, participant agents that integrate emotional factors in their judgments can be more successful because, in exchanging arguments with other agents, they consider the emotional nature of group decision making.

LAID - a smart decision room with ambient intelligence for group decision making and argumentation support considering emotional aspects

Decision Making is one of the most important activities of the human being. Nowadays decisions imply to consider many different points of view, so decisions are commonly taken by formal or informal groups of persons. Groups exchange ideas or engage in a process of argumentation and counter-argumentation, negotiate, cooperate, collaborate or even discuss techniques and/or methodologies for problem solving. Group Decision Making is a social activity in which the discussion and results consider a combination of rational and emotional aspects. In this paper we will present a Smart Decision Room, LAID (Laboratory of Ambient Intelligence for Decision Making). In LAID environment it is provided the support to meeting room participants in the argumentation and decision making processes, combining rational and emotional aspects.

Modeling group decision meeting participants with an Agent-based approach

This paper aims to present a multi-agent model for a simulation, whose goal is to help one specific participant of multi-criteria group decision making process.This model has five main intervenient types: the human participant, who is using the simulation and argumentation support system; the participant agents, one associated to the human participant and the others simulating the others human members of the decision meeting group; the directory agent; the proposal agents, representing the different alternatives for a decision (the alternatives are evaluated based on criteria); and the voting agent responsiblefor all voting machanisms.At this stage it is proposed a two phse algorithm. In the first phase each participantagent makes his own evaluation of the proposals under discussion, and the voting agent proposes a simulation of a voting process.In the second phase, after the dissemination of the voting results,each one ofthe partcipan agents will argue to convince the others to choose one of the possible alternatives. The arguments used to convince a specific participant are dependent on agent knowledge about that participant. This two-phase algorithm is applied iteratively.

Ubiquitous ambient intelligence in a flight decision assistance system

In this paper a new free flight instrument is presented. The instrument named FlyMaster distinguishes from others not only at hardware level, since it is the first one based on a PDA and with an RF interface for wireless sensors, but also at software level once its structure was developed following some guidelines from Ambient Intelligence and ubiquitous and context aware mobile computing. In this sense the software has several features which avoid pilot intervention during flight. Basically, the FlyMaster adequate the displayed information to each flight situation. Furthermore, the FlyMaster has its one way of show information.

Comunicação organizacional - efeitos da adopção de um sistema de informação

Texto integral no link do editor

Atendimento a gestantes no Sistema Único de Saúde

OBJETIVO: Analisar o atendimento ao pré-natal em unidades de saúde, com o intuito de obter uma linha de base que subsidie futuros estudos avaliativos. MÉTODOS: Realizou-se estudo exploratório para avaliação da atenção do Sistema Único de Saúde à saúde de mulheres grávidas, por meio de inquérito auto-aplicado em gestores municipais de saúde sobre amostra probabilística do tipo aleatória estratificada de 627 municípios que, submetida à técnica de expansão, permitiu análises para 5.507 municípios. O período de coleta de dados foi de outubro de 2003 a abril de 2004. O questionário captou informações sobre a prioridade às distintas modalidades de atenção, além de dados sobre a oferta de atenção e estimativa declarada de atendimento de demanda. Foram realizados os testes de qui-quadrado e t de Student para verificação de independência entre variáveis qualitativas e a igualdade entre médias, respectivamente. RESULTADOS: Dos municípios analisados, 43,8% (n=2.317) não atendiam ao risco gestacional; 81% (n=4.277) e 30,1% (n=1.592) referiram atender acima de 75% da demanda do pré-natal de baixo e alto risco, respectivamente; 30,1% (n=1.592) atendiam acima de 75% da demanda de alto risco. Atenção ao baixo risco (chi2=282,080; P<0,001 n=4.277) e ao alto risco (chi2=267,924; P<0,001 n=5.280) estiveram associadas à região geográfica, tamanho do município e modalidade de gestão no Sistema Único de Saúde. A garantia de vaga para o parto também esteve associada à modalidade de gestão. CONCLUSÕES: Houve lacunas relacionadas à oferta e qualidade da atenção ao pré-natal no Sistema Único de Saúde. A municipalização amplia a oferta de pré-natal, mas há desigualdades entre regiões e entre municípios de diferentes dimensões populacionais.