Workshop on Trust and Reputation


Copy/paste this URL to link to this paper
The workshop is organized by the LiquidPublications project (http://project.liquidpub.org/) and is a co-located event of the Agreement Technologies COST Action
(http://www.agreement-technologies.eu/).

The workshop will center around the following topics:
- Trust, reputation and norms
- Trust, reputation and organizations
- Trust, reputation, argumentation and negotiation
- Trust, reputation and semantics
- Trust, reputation and the social web
- Trust, reputation and science
- Trust, reputation and indicators

As compared to traditional conferences, the goal of the workshop is not to present research that has already been conducted. Rather, we want to create this workshop as a venue for people to meet, interact and start collaborations with researchers from other fields and backgrounds. Hence, the willingness to collaborate with others to co-produce a paper is a crucial for participating in our workshop.

There will also be a live event of the workshop taking place in Paris on December 14th+15th. You can find the programme here: http://liquidpub.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/scheduletrust-workshop-paris1.pdf

Papers open for discussion

On the correlation between bibliometric indicators and rankings of conferences and researchers

Date of publication: 20 November 2010
This paper aims at finding correlation between bibliometric indicators, that are traditionally used in research evaluation (e.g. citations count, h-index, g-index, etc.), with perceived reputation of researchers and conferences. The empirical results show that while the mentioned indicators are the essential features, among other objective criteria, in reputation of conferences, they are not the discriminant features in reputation of individual researchers.

Coherence, reliability and trust

Date of publication: 22 November 2010
In this paper I would like to report initial results of a formal model mixing coherence and reliability and gather experimental evidence to support the claim that the level of trust on an advice depends on the reliability and coherence of the advisor.

A Specification Language for Trust Models

Date of publication: 22 November 2010
We define a specification language for trust models in which the subjects' experience is taken into account. This is a meta-language for the agent to reason about its trust in other agents and how specific sources of information about trust are taken into account.

Building a recommender system that serves the user's trust

Date of publication: 22 November 2010
Is the novelty and diversity of recommender systems compatible with accuracy? This paper presents a new way of dealing with this dilemma by introducing algorithms that go beyond the simple "similarity-based" rule.

Trust as a Unifying Basis for Social Computing

Date of publication: 24 November 2010
we emphasize that although recent approaches have focused on particular aspects of trust, they have largely ignored the key foundational aspect of trust in their technical development. Specifically, the key aspect of trust is that trust reflects a dependence of one agent on another for a purpose.  The mutual dependence of agents and their successes or failures pertaining to it may be reflected in social relationships, expressed cognitively, motivated by incentives, or recorded in evidence.  But the representation and reasoning about dependence is a central concern that deserves serious study in its own right.

Trust in science, trust in journals

Date of publication: 24 November 2010
We investigate the code of ethics in regards to editorial accountability. Publication Ethics Committees for biomedical research like COPE (2003) have addressed this issue and developed a framework of editorial misbehavior, ranging from favoring the newsworthy considered as 'undesirable behaviour on the boundary' to the 'misrepresenting of authors', e.g. text changes during the publication process without informing the authors. From a sociological perspective, it seems interesting to explore the underdeveloped field of editorial misbehavior in regards to its framing and handling in the scientific publication practice.

Trust, Reputation & Authority: The Role of Quantitative Quality Indicators in Academia

Date of publication: 24 November 2010
Working in academia nowadays means being confronted with different types of quality assessment. Quality is the holy grail of academia. Yet at the same time, this term remains surprisingly fuzzy and undefined. Is quality an objective property of an object or agent – or does it lie in the eye of the beholder? How then to distinguish quality from popularity?

The role of trust in social interactions

Date of publication: 24 November 2010
This paper explores the effects of the presence of trust on the social interactions of the agents and the trustee’s trustworthiness. Trust is described as a facilitator of social interactions. The thesis is held that trust provides the opportunity of advantageous interactions and therefore it works as an incentive for the agents of the system to interact with other agents, allowing the social network among them to grow. It is stressed that the occurrence of trust should initiate a virtuous circle, in which the more the agents trust each other the more successful they become at social interactions.The idea is that agents can capitalise on the outcome of their trust-based interactions developing what is called “social intelligence”. Through interactions based on trust, agents get better at selecting potentially fruitful interactions from potentially damaging ones.

Trust and Organizations: A Position Paper

Date of publication: 30 November 2010
Trust  is  the  'firm  belief  in  the  reliability,  truth,  ability,  or  strength  of someone  or   something.' This  position  paper  asserts  that  organizations  are trusted  similarly  to   the  way  that  individuals  are  trusted. The  key  difference from  trust  of  individuals  is a  result  of  the  truster's  knowledge  that  an organization's  behavior  is  derived  from   the  behavior  of  multiple  people.   So, trust  is  formed  based  on  observing  the   behavior  of  more  people,  but  it  may persist  longer  because  the  truster  may  imagine   that  the  organizations behavior  is  less  dependent  on  individuals. 

Reputation as Multilateral Non-Costly Punishment for the Emergence of Social Norms in Self-regulated Environments

Date of publication: 30 November 2010
We are interested in observing how trust and reputation can work as a social punishment. As observed by Axelrod, “violating a norm would provide a signal about the type of person you are.”
This signalling affects consequently the agents' decision making for future interactions, producing therefore an effect on the emergence of norm.

A simple logic of trust

Date of publication: 30 November 2010
 Castelfranchi and Falcone introduced an influential theory of trust that is based on the concepts of belief, goal, capability, willingness and opportunity. We introduce a simple logic of belief and action that is based on the concept of propositional control, and argue that it provides an appropriate framework for reasoning about trust. 

Level of Conciousness in Agents taking Trust Decisions

Date of publication: 30 November 2010
This paper develops a model that takes into account agents' levels of consciousness in taking decisions about trusting or not trusting agents.

Trusting Differently: Diversity-aware search for people, content, events

Date of publication: 02 December 2010
Our goal here is to develop socially robust, usable as well as epistemologically and ethically sounds tools to support researchers in finding content, people and events that are new, but highly relevant for their research.

Lost in appearance? Reputation management, narrative identity, and trust in on-line social network environments

Date of publication: 02 December 2010
e should be very critical of the assumption that we can fully control our on-line or off-line narrative identity (reputation management as identity management); we can try to control our on-line and off-line appearances, but this control is also not complete since it crucially depends on perception by others (even in small communities) and gets totally out of control in large networks.

Toward an adaptive trust policy model for open and decentralized virtual communities

Date of publication: 02 December 2010
Recent years have witnessed increasing interest of people in creating, sharing, collaborating and socializing in many other different ways among new open and decentralized social structures called Virtual Communities (VC). They represent entities aggregation with common interests, goals, practices or values. VCs are particularly complex, uncertain and risky environments wherein trust became, rapidly, a prerequisite for the decision-making process. Within such context traditional techniques of establishing trust are regularly challenged and new trust models should be proposed in order to raise these new challenging issues.

Engineering Sociotechnical Systems for Trust

Date of publication: 02 December 2010
This paper is about the engineering of trust in STS: how should we design an STS so that it ensures trust relationships such as the above between Alice and ModernLabs in the healthcare STS? Ensuring means that we want this relationship to hold not only between Alice and ModernLabs, but between every patient-laboratory pair relationship participating in the healthcare STS. In other words, the trust relationship has to be somehow encoded into the architecture of the STS irrespective of individual actors. Hence, we refer to such trust relationships as architectural.

Diversity-aware hiring in science

Date of publication: 06 December 2010
We propose to take into account the scientific and cultural diversity of people when hiring. Hiring people different from the ones already working in the research group, department, or university can bring new contacts, viewpoints and communities. The new candidates would then not reinforce old connections of the organization, but would add new connections that could be used for collaboration.
/> Overall, when there are several candidates with similar background, we argue that hiring the candidate who is "scientifically further" from the group could be more beneficial then hiring the candidate who is "scientifically closer" to the group.

Homophily-Weighted Citation Metrics

Date of publication: 06 December 2010
The concept of homophily [2] describes relationships that are based on some measures of similarity or closeness. Despite the fact that no single definition exists for similarity, in the scope of this work, we consider two types of relationships to define similarity: citation and co-authorship.

Using these relationships, we can measure similarity to be inversely proportional to the distance that separates researchers in the co-authorship network and papers in the citation network [3]. Following this basic intuition, the rationale behind our homophily-weighted metrics consists on using the distance on these graphs to weight traditional metrics, which in this particular paper is applied to citation count.

Ups and downs of reputation-based ranking algorithms

Date of publication: 06 December 2010
when sparsity of the data and attacks of spammers are handled correctly, reputation-based ranking algorithms are able to provide superior rankings objects according to their quality and of users according to their rating ability.