1. Net-centric User Knowledge Assessment Chris Isgrig CMSC 601_SP11

2. Introduction Over the past 20-years, the Department of Defense (DoD) has had the goal of evolved from being “platform- centric” to becoming “network-centric” (net-centric). The enabling technology for the net-centric concept is Quality of Service (QoS) Networked systems are causing people to loose contact The cloud is made out of people Personnel structures are more distributed as “matrixed” organizations and “virtual” teams. How are the people in the “cloud” going to be selected, trained or promoted?

3. DIKW Hierarch

4. Theoretical Framework and Enabling Concepts QoS

5. Technical or Social The stated intent of the net-centric concept is to have systems and organizations that are built around human and organizational behavior. The stated goal is to change human and organizational behavior through technology

6. Problem The net-centric concept requires that all of the data be visible and available to the users Some of the system’s data and all of the system’s knowledge is in the users’ heads. It there a way to find out what the users know?

7. Selected References "Net-Centric Checklist", Version 2.1.3, May 12, 2004. DOD OASD NII DCIO. Alberts, D. S., Garstka, J., & Stein, F. (1999). Network Centric Warfare: Developing and Leveraging Information Superiority. Wasshington, DC: CCRP. Alberts, D. S., & Hayes, R. E. (2003). Power to the edge : command and control in the information age Washington, DC. Attali, Y., Bridgeman, B., & Trapani, C. (2010). Performance of a Generic Approach in Automated Essay Scoring. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 10(3). Bentham, J. (1787). The Panopticon Writings. London: Verso. Christie, J. (2003). Automated essay marking for content ~ does it work. Loughborough, UK: Loughborough University. Clariana, R. B.(2010). Multi-decision Approaches for Eliciting Knowledge Structure. New York, NY: Springer. Kaplan, J. M. (2006). A New Conceptual Framework for Net-Centric, Enterprise-Wide, System-of-Systems Engineering, National Defense Univ Washington DC Center For Technology National Security Policy. Ft. Belvoir. http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA453974 http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA453974 Lajis, A., & Aziz, N. A. (2010). NL Scoring Technique for the Assessment of Learners' Understanding. Paper presented at the Second International Conference on Computer Research and Development, 2010 Kuala Lumpur. Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P., & Laham, D. (1998). An Introduction to Latent Semantic Analysis. Discourse Processes, 25, 259-284. Page, E. B. (1967). Statistical and linguistic strategies in the computer grading of essays. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 1967 conference on Computational linguistics. Phister, P. W., & Plonish, I. G. (2004). Information and Knowledge Centric Warfare: The Next Steps in the Evolution of Warfare. Rome, NY.

8. Approach Assess current systems to determine if it is currently possible to locate knowledge on a network. Develop a method that provides progress toward that goal.

9. AES Methods Statistical Analysis of Features Latent Semantic Analysis (LSA) Natural Language Processing (NLP) “Bag of Features” “Bag of Words” “Bag of Triples”

10. Measuring Conformity Which is the better Mona Lisa? Which would an automated system give the higher score?

11. Can it “Get” a Joke “ I met a man who said he had not had a bite in three days…so I bit him…” I Met Given Food Given Bite Man Wants Food Wants Bite Ambiguity

12. Human Scoring Subjective Inconsistent Can be modeled

13. Bloom’s Taxonomy

14. Current AES Ability

15. Questions ?