CSI TV Drama and the Nature of Scientific Discovery

Some of the work that I have been doing on the CSI television series, and on film and drama, includes how one understands the semantics of the narrative, what makes for a great drama, and how one can predict that the outcome will be really successful based on the inputs, especially the filmscript. This work is interdisciplinary, involving computing and media arts.

Not only has this work been described in media around the world, but it is being used now to show prospective students just what mathematical algorithms are capable of.

The scope of this work is to understand drama, narrative and text. But we are aiming too at using drama and narrative to understand problem solving in our daily lives. The CSI series are great starting points for this.

Here are descriptions of our work.

The secret of ratings success. Why are academics applying algorithms to episodes of the TV drama CSI Las Vegas?, The Guardian, 1 December 2009.

La sceneggiaure perfetta, Corriere Della Sera, 1 December 2009.

TV Listings 03/12/09, Academics probe TV ratings success, p. 6, Gulf Times, Qatar, 3 December 2009.

Wie man Blockbuster vorhersagt. Software soll erfolgreiche Filme anhand des Drehbuchs identifizieren, Bild der Wissenschaft, 6 June 2008.

Software dla scenarzystów, Focus.pl, 13 June 2008.

Here’s looking at you, kid. Software promises to identify blockbuster scripts, Nature, vol. 453, p. 708, 4 June 2008.

Industry-University Research Collaboration: Do We Have It (Mostly) Wrong?

Interesting analysis by Loet Leydesdorff, “The university-industry knowledge relationship: analyzing patents and the science base of technologies”, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 55 (11), 991-1001, September 2004 or see preprint. From the conclusions:

“The science-based model of university-industry collaborations was shaped in the 1980s with biotechnology as the prime example … Our data for 2002 suggest that this pattern has now been established as a dominant pattern … Information and communication technologies, for example, have not led to similar patterns of formalized exchanges …

…

These results suggest that one should be aware that policy-makers tend to think about university-industry relations in general terminologies, but that these relations are mainly shaped in the knowledge base of the bio-medical sector. Other sectors may contain mechanisms for integration and knowledge-transfer that are completely different from these bio-medical innovations. Thus, one should not generalize easily from the experience with biotechnology and bio-medicine to other sectors of industry or disciplines of science. Biotechnology is a specific mode of interrelationship between science and industry.”

Some things here dovetail well with the report to the UK Government of Paul Wellings in September 2008, “Intellectual Property and Research Benefits“. This report points to how patenting is good for some fields but largely irrelevant for others. The report draws implications of this, for example that universities should look for consultancy and other relationships with industry as an important goal in many sectors.

It seems that Bayh-Dole is fast approaching its (general, anyway) sell-by date. This is a point also made foreceably in Loet Leydesdorff and Martin Meyer, “The Decline of University Patenting and the End of the Bayh-Dole Effect“, Scientometrics (forthcoming).

There are big implications of all of this too to what constitutes research, and what research will be in the coming years. For more on this theme see my article “Open Access, Intellectual Property, and How Biotechnology Becomes a New Software Science“.

Future Internet: at the Innovative Core of Ireland’s Smart Economy

A talk I gave recently to the Irish Future Internet Forum is available FMurtagh_SFI_3dec2009_v3.

A few points from it:

• ICT is even more a problem than a solution for our environment, and energy needs, and what can be done about this.
• ICT is clearly on a collision course with planet Earth!
• Europe has been something of a laggard in innovation in large swathes of ICT – and what can be done now.
• From report to the Swedish EU Presidency – “one of the few examples of European innovation is the file sharing service Pirate Bay, which challenges current intellectual property rules”.

Carbon Taxes: What Should Be Taxed? Or: Copenhagen, and ICT as Villain or Hero?

In Sweden there is a move towards the labelling of all food products in terms of a “climate declaration”, e.g. “Climate declared: 0.87 kg CO2 per kg of product”. See this description of this very useful development.

Viewing a web page generates an estimated 0.02g of CO2 per second. Content rich pages are 10 times greater. We know that the ICT sector’s effect on global CO2 levels is around or more than 2%, the same as (maybe more than) global aviation.

Such observations lead me to think that carbon taxes should apply more to the use of one’s mobile phone or computer, or even a meal, compared to, say, taking of a flight. It is strange that aviation and transport are viewed so often as somewhat villanous or at least environmentally taxable.

ICT though is certainly not always the hero of the hour, even if of course it is the most important part of our society’s infrastructure. One could with justice say that ICT is extremely villanous with regard to environment and climate; and that ICT is extremely virtuous with regard to energy due to the smart (power, rather than data) grid, smart meters, joint roll-out of fiber optic/power distribution/emissions infrastructure.

How best could or should a CO2-equivalent environmental tax be levied? I think on consumpution, like VAT (Value Added Tax in Europe – TVA, MWSt, etc.). Such taxation is not something punative but rather an instrument of policy. Even in micro-amounts we should be clear about what, where and when are impacting negatively on the environment. Indeed – carbon taxes should be applied to the one or more mobile phones and computers in the bag I carry or my pocket. Certainly carbon taxes should be applied to the food on my plate.

Yes indeed, this would be a way to empower the end user and to give full responsibility to me and to you for our actions and behavior.

Innovation: Let a Thousand Flowers Bloom – and then Wither…?

Roger Needham, who was a major figure in computer science, said that one should not judge the quality of the flowers in the garden from the quantity of manure used to cultivate them. He was referring to research output and the funding that is used to drive research. It’s clear that the benefits of research are their own reward for society and for the individual. From another vantage point, those who allocate funding, maybe ultimately the taxpayer, have every right to know what is derived from the nitrous deposits.

Let’s look at the flowers. It is not a bad thing to countenance a thousand flowers blooming. It is super important too to cultivate the rare and ever so valuable specimens. This is what the French call the orchidean scholarly disciplines, the orchids among the flowers, which in the long run make us proud to be earthlings.

With these floral thoughts in my mind you can imagine how dismayed I was to see an enormously crass view expressed recently by Chris Horn, whom I generally admire.

“If Ireland is to become a world centre for innovation and one of the best smart economies, then it is important to understand why Irish innovators and entrepreneurs would want to stay here in Ireland, and why overseas innovators and entrepreneurs would want to start their companies here in Ireland: the basic reason is to get rich, by building a company to sell it.”

Ouff, is that all?

“Failure is expected. It is critical to fail early … Failure is common, but so are retries: investors and management learn from mistakes and anxious to use this wisdom to become rich by trying again.”

Let a thousand flowers bloom, let them wither and decay and out of the nitrous substances more flowers will spring up. Maybe, but I am thoroughly dismayed by the short-termism of it all, by the personal and unsociable (maybe even unsocial) aggrandizement, by the crudeness of using whomever is at hand to make a quick buck, – in a word by the striking amorality of all of this.

I have noted before (see next post on “Intellectual Property, Innovation and Globalization”) how we in Europe have a real problem with consolidating and growing companies of scale and stature. It is clear that if not consolidated and growing, if companies have no future, well, yes, they should become manure. But there must be a belief in what we are doing, in our engineering of systems, and in our provision of products and services.

Content and substance must be what counts in the end. Building in order to exit is a bad way to pursue any initiative. We may be – all of us – nitrous stuff in the end, but being spectacular in between times is what makes it all worthwhile.

My hope is that our Irish and our European ambition, in engineering, science and technology, are as high as they can be, and stay that way.

Intellectual Property, Innovation and Globalization

In the Sept. 2009 study for the Swedish Presidency, Green Knowledge Society – An ICT policy agenda to 2015 for Europe’s future knowledge society, it is written:

“Some interviewees pointed to the need for Europe to move away from a ‘permission to innovate’ culture. For instance, one of the few examples of European innovation is the file sharing service Pirate Bay, which challenges current intellectual property rules. Rather than attempt to stymie this innovation, we need a more thoughtful response and to rethink rules around protection of intellectual property rights so that they are fit for a digital economy.”

As one might say for a class test, – discuss!

From the French Digital Society Plan to 2012, France Numérique 2012, Plan de développement de l’économie numérique, October 2008, some further issues are addressed: How does one hang onto intellectual property and not lose it? And what are the major stages of innovation following the early start-up and early consolidation stages?

“France and Europe are clearly wrong-footed in terms of the software industry, essentially due to the absence of actors of significant scale. Beyond a few companies like SAP (Germany) or Dassault Systèmes (France), most software giants originate in the US. … Company creation abounds today in the software sector as in many other sectors. However, the young shoots struggle to reach the stature of a world scale actor. The presence of actors of substantial scale (turnover over 500 million euro, international presence) is essential for the software ecosystem in France so as to focus activity of the sector around convergent themes. Much evidence has confirmed that the future of the young shoots is uncertain. They struggle to get the financial resources needed to get on to the global scene; and the most dynamic of them are bought out by foreign-based actors of world scale, separating the technology and the associated jobs from their territorial anchoring.”

Firstly, the critical need to attain scale is emphasized here. Sufficient scale is as much needed in business and commerce as is sufficient scaling up of speed by an aircraft.

Secondly, without sufficient and critical scale, local anchoring in the given cultural terrain will not be enough in its own right. Both critical scale and local culture are needed to build and consolidate an economy in the global context.

Third Age – Age of Unbridled Opportunity

A few points here in regard to the elderly, – the Third Age.

• The Third Age is one of great potential for Technological Innovation.

  Older people are ideally positioned, not to adapt to new technologies (why on earth should they!) but rather to develop new technologies. After all, older means wiser and more experienced. Look at the facts. “… though teenagers fueled the early growth of social networks, today they account for 14 percent of MySpace’s users and only 9 percent of Facebook’s. … The notion that children are essential to a new technology’s success has proved to be largely a myth. … Adults have driven the growth of many perennially popular Web services. YouTube attracted young adults and then senior citizens before teenagers piled on. Blogger’s early user base was adults and LinkedIn has built a successful social network with professionals as its target.”

  So the New York Times, “Who’s Driving Twitter’s Popularity? Not Teens”, 25 August 2009.

• Space is more imporant than time for the elderly – and in fact for all of us.

  This is intended in a practical sense. In retirement (in the US), 60% of people will move home. No wonder therefore that “University-linked retirement communities offer revenue for universities with space on campus, and involve small developments as well as larger. For the retirees there is stimulus, sports (golf) facilities, safe surroundings, perhaps access to Medical School and care.” (See Back on campus – Baby Boomers are flocking to campus retirement communities and, in turn, pumping money back into the school, by T. Halligan in University Business, 1 December 2004.)

  In some regions there is huge opportunity to link up with retirees, a whole industrial sector in fact. I am thinking of Ticino in Switzerland and Donegal in Ireland. Telemedicine might come into its own, at last, in a context of retirees living where they have vacationed throughout their lives – in the beautiful regions that are quite likely to be outside and away from major conurbations.

• Ambient assisted living is a hot topic. What is the most crucial testbed of all, the most crucial infrastructure for the elderly? In my opinion, very high speed broadband. High speed broadband is likely to help too with e-inclusion. Let me look (metaphorically speaking!) for a moment at digital television. The switch-off of analog is proceeding well across the globe. With the digital dividend comes, too, a great chance to bundle data and voice, as well as digital television.

  We should really go a lot further: data and voice networks, energy networks, waste networks – infrastructure for all can and should be provided at one and the same time. If there is digging up of trenches then this should surely be done once and once only. If there is broadband via overhead cabling, far less expensive than underground, then this lends itself to being jointly developed as power grids are extended to take ocean or isolated windfarm sources of energy. Mutual roll-out and maintenance of these differing networks is called for.

• Third Age Entrepreneurs.

  “… one in six of those aged 46-65 hope to embark on a new business venture rather than retire. This is seven times the number of possible start-ups from their parents’ generation – and could amount to one million new businesses” – yes indeed, as pointed out by L. Johnson, Tomorrow’s entrepreneurs – old is the new young, RSA Journal, Summer 2009, pp. 39-40.

  He continues: “Their experience and wisdom will be their secret weapon. Ageing baby boomers … realise that, thanks to collapsing pension provision and rising longevity, many of us will have to work until we’re well past 60. Not every venture started by a silver entrepreneur need be a new for-profit undertaking. It might be a charity, a social enterprise, a civic endeavour, a new neighbourhood organisation or a recreational club. We do not, after all, face a shortage of challenges or opportunities – across industry, politics or in communities.”

Final word: it is clear that enormous opportunity is there for the taking with older populations. I have just touched here on how the destiny of the aged is inextricably bound up with energy and environment; health and medicine; information and communications; finance; and entrepreneurship and innovation.

And reciprocally: our society needs the elderly to dig us out of the economic mess that we are currently in.

Why Not Zero Tolerance of Road Fatalities and Injuries?

An anniversary passed recently, the 140th, of a portentous event. According to [1], the first ever automobile fatality was in Ireland when Mary Ward, a respected microscopist, artist, astronomer and naturalist fell from a steam carriage and went under its heavy iron wheels in Birr, Co. Offaly, on 31 August 1869. In the past year, some 39,000 people have died on Europe’s streets, roads and highways as a result of traffic accidents [2]. While this figure is down on the previous year, nonetheless the downward trend is not pointing to the European target of 27,000 by 2010 (that is, 50% of the number of deaths in 2001). This target will not be realized. Globally, about 1.2 million people die each year from traffic crashes and 25 million suffer permanent disability. The current trajectory of road traffic fatalities is such that by 2020 this is expected to be the third most common cause of death. The tragedy of Mary Ward back in August 1869 goes on and on.

It is interesting to speculate on what modern technologies can offer to end the deaths and injuries in this most man-made of problems. Let me offer just a few such thoughts. Mobile phones are super abundant and location-based services are on the increase, rapidly in fact. It doesn’t have to be a matter of such mobile comms – fixed context-aware comms would be fine too.

Data transfers would lead to the potential of very powerful peer-to-peer mechanisms for the exchange of data, and ambient machine and environment data uploads. Traffic ahead, whether oncoming or receding, could provide valuable information, all the more valuable as data transfers approach real-time transfer rates. Such mechanisms could help not only with safety but with re-routing around bottlenecks and jams. On isolated country highways and byways, fixed beacons by or near the roadside could be pinged for information on ambient conditions.

The ambient machine and environment data uploads – a sort of black box recorder – would have the aim both of allowing everything to be known about an accident if such were to happen, with comprehensive learning from that; or the onboard – or in the driver’s pocket – data recorder could be linked to an insurance company such that (let us say) cultured driving earns an insurance premium rebate.

I have only begun here to envision a world where telecoms, sensors, and interaction algorithms, would meet up with road and highway engineering, transport system planning and design, and human-machine interfaces, to start with (and later financial engineering and regulatory frameworks, among other domains), in order to address this problem that just won’t go away.

This is a Grand Challenge of our time, that is addressable with modern technologies.

[1] I. Fallon and D. O’Neill, “The world’s first automobile fatality”, Accident Analysis and Prevention, 37, 601-603, 2005.

Responding to the Crisis – How Computing is Changing Everything

Updating my article discussed below under “Student recruitment as an excellent indicator of the information economy” here are some udates from the CRA, Computing Research Association.

Given the sufficient data on which these trends are based, and also given how the North American trends often lead others, these trends are worthy of consideration.

• Cumulative increase over last three years in new Bachelor students per department is 15.8%$ if only majors are considered.
• Continuing upward trend in Computer Science PhD production. Up 5.7% from mid 2007 to mid 2008.
• Unemployment rate for new PhDs less than 1%.
• Continuing increasing trend for PhDs to go directly into industry. Now at 56.6%.
• Academic employment by fresh PhDs continuing to decline. Now at 30%.
• Proportion of women among CS PhDs now up to 20.5% in 2008.

From the National Science Foundation:

• 2007 was fifth consecutive year of annual increases in PhDs produced.
• Electrical engineering – fastest growing engineering field during the decade 1998-2007, with number of PhDs awarded increasing by 51.0%.

The Quiet Revolution in Research and Its Profound Impact on Society

It has been predicted that the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA, the Obama stimulus package) will create about 402,000 jobs for one year, through an additional investment of $20 billion in research. Accountability though it critical: “Within 2 years, the public will want to be informed about the impact of the stimulus on the economic recovery. Were the estimates accurate? How can they be validated? And, in the longer term, what were the impacts of the reinvestment strategy on scientific knowledge, economic growth, and job creation?” (See J. Lane, “Assessing the impact of science funding”, Science, 324, 1273-1275, 5 June 2009.) Research nowadays is no longer blue-skies, if it ever was.

Accountability of research and measurement of impact is high on the agenda everywhere now. Is this the end of altruistic, socially-beneficially research as it once was – or as it was once perceived? No, – research has become very different in the way it is structured and organized but, as I will show, hugely more relevant and more beneficial.

A first important point to make is that appearances are not always what they are held up to be. For example the 1968 social upheaval is often viewed in terms of youth versus authority. But as I exemplified in a recent article, in fact the May events served – at least in my example – to bring the academy closer to industry. Internships became popular as a result of 1968, with university students seeing internships now as an important indication of practical relevance of their work.

Research was once seen as a source of collective knowledge. Here the early Royal Society in 17th century London comes to mind, with so much care and attention given to collecting and describing practical life- and work-based experience of varied occupations. Or look at how the modern scientific period was begun in the century before then, on the back of voyaging and trading.

Research now has moved beyond these goals. Research has become the production of intellectual goods. Based on intellectual goods, research has become the production of intellectual properties.

We should understand intellectual property (IP) quite generally because there are areas where there is considerable evolution right now relative to traditional contexts. Consider e.g. research publishing itself. The research journal is usually traced to the Philosophical Transactions and the Journal des Sçavants, both started in 1665. Nowadays research journals dominate the scene for research and scholarly output. There are other outlets, including conference proceedings, books (monographs are at issue here), and in our more enlightened and also evolving times, data sets, software, and various forms of multimedia object. The trend towards reproducible research is only starting and has implications for data and software. We have therefore a changing landscape of research product and process, with attendant rights and responsibilities.

It would be nice to think that intellectual goods and IP in the research arena are showing the way forward for digital rights management. Maybe in the future the general roll-out to society at large of rights management in research will appear to us as reminiscent of how the web all started because physicists wanted to exchange documents.

So research has become the production of intellectual goods, some of which result in intellectual properties.

We have yet to arrive at a way to measure in the absolute what these intellectual goods bring to society. But it is clear that research has become the mainstay of any modern economy.

It is interesting to note though that powerful ways of measuring relative impact are now core to the way that research is carried out. Moreover the model of how research is comparatively assessed has become a mirror for many other areas of social activity. Examples: government processes; and business practice. Let me draw out just how the impact of research is assessed in a relative way.

Benchmarking has come to the fore, as a new managerial approach. This not a command and control, centralized, hierarchical way of organizing research or other social activities. Instead we have league tables, rankings, scorecards – a way to organize activities that is distributed and autonomous. This is not so much government any more as governance.

Universities everywhere look towards the Shanghai rankings; student satisfaction surveys in universities and institutes of learning are reported on in the newspapers; countries have their scorecards for telecoms infrastructure, for Business Expenditure on Research and Development, and so on; the UK had the Research Assessment Exercise and will have the Research Evaluation Framework, Australia will have its Excellence in Research for Australia; and so on and on. Within companies there are examples, and within governments lots of examples too. The rise of governance fits well with competitiveness through benchmarking. It fits really well with modern development models of the knowledge economy and of the nurturing of human capital.

There is a useful article by Isabelle Bruno in Lille on this, that links the new benchmarking-based, and competitiveness-oriented governance to the Lisbon strategy in Europe, – growing the European knowledge economy and associated human capital through research. Furthermore governance has a clear managerial principle underpinning it, where government could be said to have had an underpinning legal principle.

Since the 1990s, there have been enormous changes – behind the scenes – in research and the way it is structured on the global level. The mix of competition and cooperation is now at the core of research. Already significant aspects of government and of business are in tow. Government and business have taken on board how research is carried out and copied the benchmarking models established in research.

It is true that there is still evolution in how impact of research is measured in absolute terms. But in relative terms, what we see is that the impact of research is captured through competitiveness and innovation. These in turn have been taken on board as essential organizational drivers by governement and business.

Just like the web’s take-off through Marc Andreessen’s Mosaic browser in early 1993, once again research innovation – this time through organisation and a new dynamic – is changing society completely.

Going on from this, it will be very interesting to see how rights management and the myriad IP processes that have evolved and developed in research are generalized to all of society in the coming years. I have no doubt they will be, if only because research has established itself as the major source of innovation, change and renewal in our time.