Partner modeling is mutual

Abstract

Abstract. Collaborative learning has been hypothesized to be related to the cognitive effort engaged by co-learners to build a shared understanding. The process of constructing this shared understanding requires each team member to build some kind of representation of the behavior, beliefs, knowledge or intentions of other group members. This contribution reports interesting findings regarding to the process of modeling each other. In two empirical studies, we measured the accuracy of the mutual model, i.e. the difference between what A believes B knows, has done or intends to do and what B actually knows, has done or intends to do. In both studies, we found a significant correlation between the accuracy of A's model of B and the accuracy of B's model of A. This leads us to think that the process of modeling one's partners does not simply reflect individual attitudes or skills but emerges as a property of group interactions. We describe on-going studies that explore these preliminary results.

Social tagging revamped

“…Mutual acquaintances possess accurate information about each other (e.g., the work they do, where they live, what they like, and so forth). This information is organized into a mental model that is usually referred to as mutual because of its reciprocal nature [ 21] 3 . Our hypothesis is that this mutual model might help produce more descriptive metadata for the multimedia content because of the implicit knowledge that the peers in a social network might have about the content of a friend.…”

“…In our work, we focus on -and structure the activity within-networks of peers that know each other (i.e., social networks). As friends and family members possess mental models [21] of each other, they are in a privileged position to create rich descriptors of the user-generated multimedia content.…”

“…3 Mutual modeling is the process of building assumptions about the beliefs and the knowledge of one's partner(s). Sangin et al [21] demonstrated that this process is grounded at group level: i.e., A posses a model of B and B possess a model of A. These might not be symmetrical.…”

SCAN tools for collaborative learning

“…• How does group awareness develop over time? For instance, Sangin, Nova, Molinari, and Dillenbourg (2007) have found that the dynamics of group awareness are quite complex, as learners' use of SCANrelevant information is partially dependent on the use of the same information by their collaborators. • What is the relative efficiency of intentional vs. non-intentional metaphors of social navigation?…”

Mutual Modelling in Robotics

“…Dillenbourg proposes in [40] a model to represent mutual modelling situations. He uses the notation M(A, B, X) to denote "A knows that B knows X" (equivalent to the epistemic logic notation KAKBX that we present in the next section).…”