Abstract:
An application program, system and methods are configured to implement concurrent multiuser epistemological collaboration, that is, collaborative development of a digital knowledge model based on at least one epistemological “experience,” which is stored as a structured data entity containing information that can be personally perceived (typically viewed, read, observed) by multiple concurrent users of the application over a network. The users develop the digital knowledge model, by way of GIU interactions, comprising assertion entities and belief entities based on the experience and/or selected portions of the experience defined by focus entities; wherein each set of assertion entities is related as a child of a corresponding individual experience of the set of experience entities; and each set of belief entities is related as a child of a corresponding individual assertion of the set of assertion entities.

Description:
PRIORITY 
       [0001]    This application is a non-provisional of, and claims priority to U.S. provisional application Ser. No. 62/301,432, filed Feb. 29, 2016, incorporated herein by this reference in its entirety. 
     
    
     COPYRIGHT NOTICE 
       [0002]    ®2017 IFWIZARD CORPORATION. A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material which is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever. 37 CFR §1.71(d). 
       TECHNICAL FIELD 
       [0003]    Computerized education technology, and more specifically computer-implemented systems and methods for epistemological modeling based on concurrent, multiuser interactions and data structures in support thereof. 
       BACKGROUND 
       [0004]    Philosophy has examined the nature of knowledge and truth since its historical beginnings, with prominent philosophers advancing a great variety of epistemological models. While the field of logic has attracted considerable consensus in its development, given the inherent importance of verifiability and consistency, especially with regards to deductive logic, epistemology is far more divergent. No single epistemological model has emerged to represent the majority of philosophers or lay persons&#39; view. Relatedly, the simple question of “what is truth?” has eluded consensus, with a multitude of popular definitions. 
         [0005]    Modern conventional education typically seeks to produce, in addition to skills, conformance in the learner&#39;s knowledge to that of some predetermined set, i.e. the mastery of a curriculum. Thus, considerable research into educational theory has been concerned with improvements in this transference of knowledge and the application of computer-based conditioning techniques such as through “gamification” has enjoyed popularity in the search of more efficient knowledge transfer. 
         [0006]    However, another potential goal of education is to encourage a more personal discovery of truth. This more pluralistic approach certainly may incorporate discovery of other&#39;s views, potentially enriching and broadening the perspective of learners. With such goals, computerized education technology which have conditioning towards only a singular outcome, e.g. only a singular truth or perspective, fall short of this more exploratory goal. 
         [0007]    Extant technology that is perhaps more appropriate to this endeavor includes general purpose creative tools such as outlining, mind mapping, argument mapping, and deductive programming environments. However, these tools are very rarely designed with a multitenant use case in mind. And, in the case of logical or rhetorical aides, typically presume a single model of truth. In particular, the explicit element of personal belief is lacking, as the existing tools presume an implicit confidence in the models that they create. 
         [0008]    Furthermore, there is typically the presumption of adherence to a particular epistemological system, rather than a more open ended architecture that can encompass most of the varieties of epistemological philosophy. This constraint is understandable given the tools typical functional purpose, rather than as a more purely exploratory purpose, but is a critical limitation of the utility of such a tool while permitting diverse views of truth and knowledge. 
         [0009]    Given these limitations and constraints, the divergence in individual philosophies on truth and knowledge, and the general trend in education towards more testable conditioning rather than open minded exploration, there is a gap in the available technology. No existing environment or product is designed for concurrent structured exploration of multiple learner perspectives in such a way that the personal conception of fact and faith are present, whether as model creator or critic. 
       SUMMARY OF THE DISCLOSURE 
       [0010]    The following is a summary of the present disclosure in order to provide a basic understanding of some features and context. This summary is not intended to identify key/critical elements of the invention or to delineate the scope of the invention. Its sole purpose is to present some concepts of the present disclosure in a simplified form as a prelude to the more detailed description that is presented later. 
         [0011]    Accordingly, it is an object of the present disclosure to provide a system, method and data structures for multiple human users to simultaneously articulate, explore, and critically examine their own and each other&#39;s views and beliefs in a graphical user interface of a computer system. It is a further object of the disclosure that this epistemological exploration be originated ultimately from phenomenological experiences which may be reproduced exactly and consistently for any and all users, providing a common object of study about which views may be formed. This exploration may be further structured through virtual windows of focus descending from a parent experience to a child experience, such as, in some embodiments, an article to its footnotes, a visual film to a specific scene, or an interview to its topic questions. 
         [0012]    It is also an object of the present disclosure to offer within this method a generic structure for separating the objective, unqualified experiences from subjective assertions about these experiences and, further, to separate personal beliefs about these assertions from the assertions themselves with the intention to permit a plurality of beliefs about assertion statements. These assertions and beliefs may be contained within assertion sets and belief sets respectively, to group analyses and personal beliefs into collections potentially matched to specific users, modes of thought, or other classifications. 
         [0013]    Another feature of the present disclosure comprises a complete method and system for a server-client networked configuration to provide the collaborative encounter between multiple users through a communication bus, journaling change logger, and data object storage and retrieval in such a way that the encounter is provided with reliable resource efficiency, timely updates, and data consistency across a variety of nondeterministic and asynchronous clients. 
         [0014]    In some embodiments, our invention utilizes some common components of real-time collaboration such as chat in a non-essential way. The core of this disclosure, however, is the collective construction and examination of knowledge models and the assertions/beliefs around them, as enabled by suitable computer resources including a database. While any textual/lingual computer data (e.g. a Wiki page) can theoretically represent human knowledge, the structure and constraints we impose are unique, especially in that they do not presume to make an absolute logic diagram. 
         [0015]    This is of especial significance because for example, a Wiki Page provides a single canonical representation of knowledge/truth (even if within that representation multiple views or “sides” are presented). Our structure completely ignores the question of what is ultimately true and encourages personal exploration of our models and beliefs rather than conditioning towards a single authoritative understanding. This is what makes it special, which is quite apart from what almost all educational software is focused on, i.e. “mastery”—meaning memorization of that single authoritative understanding. 
         [0016]    The invention is intended to be implemented in software; i.e., in one or more computer programs, routines, functions or the like. Thus it may best be utilized on a machine such as a computer or other device that has at least one processor and access to memory, as further described later. Accordingly, in this description, we will sometimes use terms like “component,” “subsystem,” “entity,” “interface,” or the like, each of which would be implemented in software. We also refer to “properties” of an entity; it should be recalled that typically a single property of an entity consists of a field-value pair. 
         [0017]    In a preferred system, computing assets are configured to provide the collaborative encounter between multiple users through a communication bus, journaling change logger, and data object storage and retrieval in such a way that the encounter is provided with reliable resource efficiency, timely updates, and data consistency across a variety of nondeterministic and asynchronous clients. An example arrangement is illustrated in  FIGS. 11-14 . Manual or “pencil and paper” solutions are not feasible for providing these characteristics in any useful way. To take just one example, it would be impossible to manually “rewind” an interactive session to identify how one user&#39;s perception affected another user&#39;s view of the same objective experience; or, assess how a specific temporal sequence of interactions influenced the evolving model. 
     
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
         [0018]    In order to describe the manner in which the above-recited and other advantages and features of the disclosure can be obtained, a more particular description follows by reference to the specific embodiments thereof which are illustrated in the appended drawings. Understanding that these drawings depict only typical embodiments of the invention and are not therefore to be considered to be limiting of its scope, the invention will be described and explained with additional specificity and detail through the use of the accompanying drawings in which: 
           [0019]      FIG. 1  is a conceptual diagram of the principal functional components of an illustrative knowledge model consistent with the present disclosure. 
           [0020]      FIG. 2  illustrates components of an example of an experience-assertion-belief sequence. 
           [0021]      FIG. 3  illustrates examples of properties of an experience entity and example derivative experience formats. 
           [0022]      FIG. 4  illustrates example properties of a focus entity and example derivative focus formats. 
           [0023]      FIG. 5  illustrates example properties of a topic focus and its permissible parent experience formats. 
           [0024]      FIG. 6  illustrates example properties of an index focus and its permissible parent experience formats. 
           [0025]      FIG. 7  illustrates example properties of a span focus and its permissible parent experience formats. 
           [0026]      FIG. 8  illustrates example properties of a position focus and its permissible parent experience formats. 
           [0027]      FIG. 9  illustrates example properties of a region focus and its permissible parent experience formats. 
           [0028]      FIG. 10  illustrates components of an example of an experience-focus-experience sequence. 
           [0029]      FIG. 11  illustrates an example network relationship of components within an example embodiment of the present disclosure. 
           [0030]      FIG. 12  illustrates the properties of assertion sets, assertions, belief sets, and beliefs. 
           [0031]      FIG. 13  illustrates an example graphical user interface for interfacing with the invention. 
           [0032]      FIG. 14  illustrates the sequence of events in the communication bus. 
       
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS 
       [0033]    The following detailed description refers to the accompanying drawings. Wherever possible, the same reference numbers are used in the drawings and the following description to refer to the same or similar elements. For clarity and simplicity, not all characteristics of practical embodiments are described in the specification. However, it is appreciated that many embodiment-specific decisions have to be made in developing the practical embodiments in order to achieve a particular object of the developer. While embodiments of the invention may be described, a person skilled in the relevant art would recognize that modifications, adaptations, and other implementations are possible without parting from the spirit and scope of the invention. For example, substitutions, additions, or modifications may be made to the elements illustrated in the drawings, and the methods described herein may be modified by substituting, reordering, or adding stages to the disclosed methods. Accordingly, the following detailed description does not limit the invention. Instead, proper scope of the invention is defined by the appended claims. 
         [0034]      FIG. 1  illustrates the functional components of a knowledge belief model  100 . These components may be represented and stored as machine-readable data entities. For example, assertion entities and belief entities are described in more detail later with regard to  FIG. 12 . The model  100  contains a set of consistent perceptual experiences  101 . Again, each experience is realized as a data entity, which may take any appropriate machine accessible form. These experiences  101  may have a set of dependent experiences  103  whose connection is defined by a single focus  102  defining the scope of connection. The model  100  contains at least one assertion set  104  with which are associated assertions  105 , each containing a propositional statement. Any root experience  101  or dependent experience  103  may have one or more assertions  105 , varying according to a given set of assertions  104 . Each assertion may have one or more beliefs  107  describing the nature of trust in the assertion  104  according to a specific belief set  106 , of which the model  100  contains at least one. 
         [0035]      FIG. 2  illustrates an example experience-assertion-belief sequence. In this example, the raw perceptual experience  101  is a drawing of a bird and it has two assertions  105  connected to it, one stating that the experience  101  is a “sculpture of a bicycle” and the other stating it is a “drawing of a bird”. These assertions  105 , in turn, each have a belief connected to them demonstrating 100% disagreement/90% confidence and 100% agreement/100% confidence respectively. To be clear, in this document, we frequently refer to “experience,” “assertion,” etc. to mean not the literal thing, but rather as a shorthand to refer to a corresponding machine-readable data entity that represents the thing. This style, common in computer science, is used to reduce redundancy and improve readability. 
         [0036]      FIG. 3  illustrates an example of properties of an experience entity  101  and various derivative experience formats, each of which inherits the properties of the stereotypical experience type  101 . The properties of an experience  101  may include, for example, its title, creating user, creation date and time, model, format kind, MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extension) type, perceptual content URL (Uniform Resource Locator), “thumbnail” image URL for previewing the content, and a key-value mapping generic properties list. The last element enables arbitrary key-value pairs suited to any specific type of experience, without limitation to those listed above or now known. In this way, the arbitrary key-value pairs are a “future-proofing” to allow very generic adaption to different uses. In simple terms, an experience will often take the form of what is commonly called “digital content.” It must be presented to all users of the system in a consistent, objective way. An experience is something which may be perceived and considered on its own (though there may be benefits to considering the parent context). A single frame of video within a movie is an experience, derivative of the parent experience, the movie. In this example, a derivative of an experience is akin to a subset. Within that frame of video, a close up of someone&#39;s face could be a further derivative experience, with the frame as parent and movie as grandparent. A focus (further described below) is the mapping between the child and parent experience (i.e. “03:22:01” as movie frame location). 
         [0037]    Example derivative experience subclass formats may include a text experience  300  which reference a single block of textual characters, image experience  301  which references a single flat bitmap or vector image, audio experience  302  which references a single continuous auditory recording, video experiences  303  which references a single continuous video recording, file experience  304  which references a single computerized file of any type, website experience  305  which references a single network URL such as for an Internet website, map experience  306  which references a two-dimensional map, 3D experience  307  which references a three-dimensional space or model, location experience  308  which references a geographical location point, timeline experience  309  which references a chronological event listing, and an expert system experience  310  which references an interactive knowledgebase. 
         [0038]      FIG. 4  illustrates the properties of a focus  102  and some examples of derivative focus formats, all of which inherit the properties of the stereotypical focus type  102 . The properties of a focus  102  may include its creating user, creation date and time, model, format kind, originating parent experience, and dependent child experience. These are a necessary minimum set of properties. They may be stored differently from the arbitrary pairs because they have special constraints on their values (e.g., a “dependent child experience” must map to a child experience&#39;s ID). Example derivative focus subclass formats may include a topic focus  400  which represents a single textual topic or question of the parent experience  101 , an index focus  401  which represents a single real number index or linear position within the parent experience  101 , a span focus  402  which represents a real number start and end linear positions within the parent experience  101 , a position focus  403  which represents a two or three dimensional real number position within the parent experience  101 , and a region focus  404  which represents a two or three dimensional region as a series of two or three dimensional real number positions (points) mapping a manifold surface through its maximum closed extents. 
         [0039]      FIG. 5  illustrates the properties of a topic focus  400  as a single textual topic or question with its permissible parent experience formats including text experiences  300 , image experiences  301 , audio experiences  302 , video experiences  303 , file experiences  304 , website experiences  305 , map experiences  306 , 3D experiences  307 , location experiences  308 , timeline experiences  309 , and expert system experiences  310 . A topic focus&#39;s  400  permissible child experience  101  may be of any format. 
         [0040]      FIG. 6  illustrates the properties of an index focus  401  as a single real number index in the linear extents of its parent experience  101  with its permissible parent experience formats including text experiences  300 , audio experiences  302 , video experiences  303 , file experiences  304 , 3D experiences  307 , timeline experiences  309 , and expert system experiences  310 . An index focus&#39;s  401  permissible child experience  101  may be of any format. 
         [0041]      FIG. 7  illustrates the properties of a span focus  402  as a real number start and end indices within the parent experience  101  space with its permissible parent experience formats including text experiences  300 , audio experiences  302 , video experiences  303 , file experiences  304 , 3D experiences  307 , and timeline experiences  309 . A span focus&#39;s  402  permissible child experience  101  may be of any format. 
         [0042]      FIG. 8  illustrates the properties of a position focus  403  as a two or three dimensional real number position (point) in the parent experience  101  with its permissible parent experience formats including image experiences  301 , map experiences  306 , 3D experiences  307 , and location experiences  308 . A position focus&#39;s  403  permissible child experience  101  may be of any format. 
         [0043]      FIG. 9  illustrates the properties of a region focus  404  as a series of two or three dimensional real number positions (points) in the parent experience  101  space with its permissible parent experience formats map experiences  306 , 3D experiences  307 , and location experiences  308 . A region focus&#39;s  404  permissible child experience  101  may be of any format. 
         [0044]      FIG. 10  illustrates the components of an example experience-focus-experience sequence showing a parent experience  101  referencing a book on plant-only dietary practices. A focus  102  links the detail of pages 89 through 90 of that parent experience  101  to a child experience  101  that highlights a quote by the parent experience&#39;s  101  author. An assertion  105  about the quote is connected, drawing the conclusion that “only plants are healthy food for humans.” This assertion  105  has a belief  107  showing partial agreement and mixed or partial confidence with an explanatory comment. 
         [0045]      FIG. 11  illustrates an example network relationship of components providing a human user  1106  with access to the model  100 . The human user  1106  accesses an application  1103  provided by an application server  1101  available on the computer network  1100 , causing the application server  1101  to interact with the database server  1102  through the computer network  1100  to provide a gateway to the internal models  100 . The client user  1105  joins a named room  1104  which may be shared with other users  1105 . The room  1104  the user has joined provides at least one model  100  which then may be concurrently viewed and modified by all the room&#39;s  1104  users  1105 . 
         [0046]      FIG. 12  illustrates the properties of assertion sets  104 , assertions  105 , belief sets  106 , and beliefs  107 . Assertion set  104  properties include its title, description, creating user  1105 , creation date and time, and model  100 . Assertion  105  properties include its creating user  1105 , creation date and time, target experience  101 , propositional statement, list of experiences  101  and assertions  105  as additional supporting evidence, and the assertion set  104  to which the assertion  105  belongs. Belief set  106  properties include its title, description, creating user  1105 , creation date and time, model  100 , and the assertion set  104  to which the belief set  106  belongs. Belief  107  properties include its creating user  1105 , creation date and time, target assertion  105 , agreement with the assertion  105  as a normalized positive (agreement) or negative (disagreement) magnitude, confidence in the assertion  105  as a normalized positive (certain) or zero (uncertain) magnitude, comment for the creating user&#39;s  1105  explanation of their belief, and the belief set  106  to which the belief  107  belongs. 
         [0047]      FIG. 13  illustrates an example graphical user interface for interfacing with the invention. The client window  1300  contains a user list  1301  showing the current room&#39;s  1104  users  1105 . These users may converse with each other through the communication bus  1406  in a noncommittal, ephemeral chat window  1302  that does not get stored with the model  100 . A menu bar  1303  provides selection and creation of the model  100 , assertion set  104 , and belief set  106 , as well as the creation of new root experiences  101 . The model graph  1304  provides an interactive graphical display of the relationship between model  100  components including experiences  101 , focuses  102  (shown as a labelled edge), assertions  105 , and beliefs  107 . The detail panel  1305  provides an extensive form for viewing and editing specific components. In the example case, the child experience  101  is selected, providing a view into its properties, as well as information on the connecting focus  102  and parent experience  101 , and tools for creating new focuses  102  or assertions  105 . 
         [0048]      FIG. 14  illustrates the sequence of events providing communication between the user  1105 , the application server  1101 , and the database server  1102 . The client user interface  1400  may push  1407  entity actions or chat messages for the room as a change set to the client bus  1401  at any time. At a repeated regular polling interval  1405 , the client bus  1401  then transmits  1409  all accumulated pending change sets to the application server  1101  over the network  1100 . These change sets are then processed  1410  by modifying the entities stored in the database  1404  through remote procedure calls on the database server  1102  over the network  1100 . The change set is then appended to the change journal  1412  and all change sets which have been recorded since the client&#39;s last bus request  1408  was completed are assembled  1411 . The journal head index is advanced  1413  and the interim change sets are returned  1414  to the client bus  1401 . These changes are then used to update the user interface elements  1415 , completing the client input-output  1406  sequence and the loop  1405  is repeated.