You are here:

Ontology-based 3-d visualisation of composited concepts
PROCEEDINGS

, , Multimedia University, Malaysia

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Montreal, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-56-3 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

The problems of disorientation and cognitive overload highlight the need for ontological structures and different degrees of granularity in presentation. This paper presents a 3-dimensional visualization of concepts structured ontologically using the concept lattice. Concepts are composited to enable different levels of abstraction in presentation and focus. Pilot test results indicate that students are positive about the 3-dimensional composited means of navigation and information retrieval.

Citation

Lee, C.S. & Lim, W.C. (2005). Ontology-based 3-d visualisation of composited concepts. In P. Kommers & G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2005--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 3953-3960). Montreal, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 13, 2024 from .

© 2005 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Ahmed, K. (2002). Introducing Topic Maps, September, 2002. URL: http://www.syscon.com/story/?storyid=40494 & DE=1
  2. Bieber, M., & Yoo, J.H. (1999). Hypermedia: a design philosophy. ACM Computing Surveys, 31(4es): 29. Workshop on Ontologies for Intelligent Educational Systems, IOS Press, Le Mans, France, July 18-19, 1999.
  3. Calvi, L. (1996). Hypermedia design and mental models: a case study. ED-MEDIA '96: Proceedings of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Carlson, P. (ed.), AACE, 75-80.
  4. Carpineto, C. & Romano, G. (1995). Automatic Construction of Navigable Concept Networks Characterizing Text Databases. AI*IA, 67-78 Dichev, C. Dicheva, D. & Aroyo, L (2004). Using Topic Maps for Web-based Education. In Int. J. Advanced Technology for Learning, 1(1), 1-7.
  5. Evans, C., & Edwards, M. (1999). Navigational interface design for multimedia courseware. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 8 (2), 151-174.
  6. Garshol, L.M. (2002). What are Topic Maps. URL: http://www.xml.com/lpt/a/2002/09/11/topicmaps.html
  7. Lebow, D. (1993). Constructivist values for instructional systems design: five principles toward a new mindset. ETR & D, 41 (3), 4-16.
  8. Lee C.S. (2004). Reuse in modelling instructional design. Ed-Media 2004. Lugano, Switzerland: AACE.
  9. Mizoguchi, R., & Ikeda, M. (1996) Towards Ontology Engineering. Osaka University, Technical Report AI-T R-96-1, I.S.I.R.
  10. Newcomb, S.R. & Biezunski, M (2000). Topic Maps go XML. URL: http://www.gca.org/papers/xmleurope2000/papers/s1102.html
  11. Norman, D.A. (1987). Cognitive Engineering-Cognitive Science. In J.M. Carroll (Ed.), Interfacing thought: Cognitive aspects of human-computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books. Resource Description Framework. URL: http://www.w3.org/RDF/
  12. Sneiderman, B. (1996). The eyes have it: a task by da type taxonomy for information visualisations. Proceedings of the 1996 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages (VL’96), 336-343.
  13. Verbert, K. & Duval, E. (2004). Towards a global component architecture for learning objects: A comparative analysis of learning object content models. Ed-Media 2004, June 2004.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References