blue_dog part 1
===


### General Questions ###


investigator: Recording in progress. Okay. Now you've finished answering the first few questions now let's get to the next part. If you click continue to the next section thingy. 

blue_dog: Yes, I just, I'm now in general questions regarding use of digital libraries. 


##### GQ1 #####


investigator: Okay. So now think about which tasks do you usually use a digital library for?

Please tick all answers, which apply and yeah. If some tasks that you do are not given here, please fill 'em in under "others". And please give short oral examples of the tasks that you're taking.  So, for example, if you take person search, please tell us how you do the person search. So, do you consider person search as keeping track of yourself in a digital library or yeah, something else.

blue_dog: So, I'm usually using the person search when I'm interested in checking up or looking up if there's a new version of a paper from the same person. So, if there are any new findings about a topic so I can look that up. So, I'm checking the first section part. I dunno.

I'm also looking for papers. So, if I'm conducting new research, I'm just going on DBLP or ACM to find specific papers regarding a specific topic. When you search, I am not quite sure what's that about. But I'm also use for example, DBLP to import BibTeX data. So, I can cite these papers for my own research.

And I also like to download papers. So, if there are available via any famous site, I alSo, have these tasks of getting the full text papers. And it's also quite interesting these study relations. So, if there's any co-author who went further into a specific topic, I'm also checking this one.

And let me think of other stuff. I think I'm also quite familiar with the topic search in ACM. So, it's also quite useful to just skim through the topics and I think I'm just writing this under "Sonstiges". 

investigator: Oh, yes. Correct. To me it's "Weitere". 


##### GQ2 #####


blue_dog: Okay, so next we up, we have which system or digital library do we usually use to solve these tasks?

investigator: Please tick all answers, which apply and you can also name others, which are not listed here. And please give short oral description. Why you like them or for what you use the system? 

blue_dog: I'm first checking ACM digital library because it's one of the more public ones which were also presented in a university lecture.

And I'm also quite familiar with the DBLP and I'm also quite liking or like both. But I think the DBLP is much more technical and more forward. So, if you are just like to import BibTeX data, I think it's much more easier. And I don't think you can import them from ACM, but I'm not quite sure.

I also sometimes when I'm using search engine. So, I can also check the usual search engine stone at the bottom. I also end up on Google scholar So, I think it's linked to the usage of the Google search engine, but from then I am just going back to like the digital libraries and I'm not quite sure if it's a digital library itself, but I'm al So, often find myself using crossref because...

investigator: It's a system. That's okay. Yeah. Because?

blue_dog: So, should I edit to the "Sonstige"? 

investigator: Yes. 

blue_dog: Because there's a quite popular library that allows you to import or search papers from the command line and it itself uses crossref to then link back to the ACM or DBLP and that then, then you can like look up authors papers and can directly open the PDFs or import the BibTeX with just a short command or something. Like that. So, yes, I think I'm done with this page. 


### TASK 1 ###


investigator: Okay, perfect. 

So, let's continue to the first task. Okay. Are you on the next page? 

blue_dog: Yes. 

investigator: Okay. Consider the following tasks, find two experts on a topic of your liking example topics could be "domain specific query languages" or "hashing functions", but you should yeah, but the topics that you choose or should be from the broad area of computer information science.


##### TASK 1.1 #####


So, you do not really have to do this. But we are going to talk about how you would solve this task. So, the first question is what is your chosen topic? 

blue_dog: So I'd like to choose the “linked open data” of the semantic web part. 


##### TASK 1.2 #####


investigator: Okay, perfect. And how familiar are you with this topic? 

blue_dog: That's, I'm not quite sure to say this.

I'm did a lot of research for myself. I also, wrote my bachelor's thesis about this topic, and I think I'm not an expert. I'm also, I'm just familiar with the topic. If that puts it into terms. 


##### TASK 1.3 #####


investigator: Yes. Perfect. Okay. Then the next question is how would you define an expert? 

blue_dog: Mm, I would define an expert in this topic maybe about the H index or something who has written a lot about this topic and is also quite a lot referenced and acknowledged. Has published in large or good Conferences or conference papers.

And who's also very much, how do you say it? More like promoted. So, if you are looking in ACM, for example, you can directly see who's quite knowledgeable in this topic and can directly go to his profile page and they also, accumulate what the author is famous for, or is… How do you say it? My English at the morning. He's…

investigator: You can also say it in German, and I can try to translate it for you. 

blue_dog: "Der wird quasi darüber berühmt oder promoted". 

investigator: "Is popular for this topic", maybe?

blue_dog: Yes. And these topics are his core competence, for example.

investigator: Okay, then let's go to question four. If this is everything you wanted to say to the third one?

blue_dog: Yes. 


##### TASK 1.4 #####


investigator: Okay. So, how would you solve the task with your chosen topic? How would you find two experts on linked open data? 

blue_dog: I would go just as in the previous question, I would go to ACM and type in the topic and then from there on just look for the most cited papers and skim through the authors. 

investigator: Would you do this at the same time, or would you just do it sequentially?

blue_dog: I would do it sequentially. So, it's not like with multiple tabs open. I would just, or maybe from this point forward, I would open these papers or publications in multiple tabs and go from there on to the author's pages and look how well they, their publications are received. 

investigator: Okay. How do you go to the author pages?

blue_dog: I think in ACM, you can directly click on the author's name. So, I, okay. I'm picking the most popular papers, and then you can go to the first authors page and then would just open them and parallel to process through them and look for yeah, the most popular papers and look, if I can use this information or if there's really. So, I'm evaluating for myself, if the papers from the authors or here it is to find an expert.

So, I have to evaluate for myself, if I think he's really an expert because most likely in the last second, over two years, you can also have a really large h index and it just says nothing if he's an expert or not. So, I have to take in consideration my own evaluation, and then I'm just, yeah. Going through and if these stats or values match my own evaluation, then I'm just like, yeah, they are an expert. 

investigator: Okay. Perfect. Thanks. So, this answer is question four for you?

blue_dog: Yes. 


### TASK 2 ###


investigator: Okay. Then let's continue to the next section with task two. Consider the following task find relevant papers from a topic of your liking, which appeared after 2017.

So, example topics could be "paper recommendation" or "author disambiguation" but should be from a broader area of computer and information science. 


##### TASK 2.1 #####


So, what would be your chosen topic for finding relevant papers, which appeared after 2017? You can also pick the same one as in the previous question.

blue_dog: I think I would go with a different topic. I'm choosing “heterogeneous computing” and ...


##### TASK 2.2 #####


Regarding question two, I'm not quite familiar with this topic. So, I'm, if it's just a completely new topic, maybe it's a different way and ...


##### TASK 2.3 #####


I would define the relevancy of the paper... if it's published in a very good or I think it's called "A" conference, I don't really know quite now. And if it's cited a lot. That's how I would define relevancy on the fly right now. 


##### TASK 2.4 #####


investigator: Okay. Yep. That's good. That's perfect. Okay then let's continue to the fourth question. How would you solve this task of finding relevant papers from heterogeneous, whatever which appeared after 2017?

blue_dog: I think here it's quite easy to use DBLP because I think in the latest version of the web version, you have a date or year in the left column, so you can just search for "heterogeneous computing". And I think they're also sorted by year. So, I just have to search for it and go through these rows, which are newer than 2017.

And from there on, I just have to filter relevant papers or applications by these terms, which I have defined in the question three. 

investigator: How would you do this in DBLP or would you switch to something else? 

blue_dog: Maybe I'm more familiar with ACM. So, there might be a possibility to switch to ACM, but I'm not quite sure if there's something like cited.

So, how much cited these publications are? And maybe it's hidden. Inside these pages. I maybe have to look it up right now, but I think it's when it's there it's somewhere hidden or collapsed or something and or they did some own or ordering, but I don't know about the internal.

So, I maybe would just switch to ACM because they list the stats and the right-hand pop up on the side. 

investigator: Okay. And you mentioned that you would look at the rank of a venue where paper appeared. How do you check this in ACM or DBLP for the papers that are listed for your query? 

blue_dog: I think they are they are given at least an ACM.

I also think it's possibly also in the BibTeX data. So, they also track where it was published. And from there on, I need to do the tedious task to check for myself. What are good or highly ranked conferences and filter from there on, from my own. So, I don't think that's already inside any of these digital libraries to know what are so called good or yeah.

And from there on, I would just do it on my own. 

investigator: How would you check this? Do you have a page that you go to, or do you have a specific procedure that you do, how you do to see if a conference is good, or journal is good. 

blue_dog: Mm, not really. Mostly I would discuss this topic with other people and if they say like for example, we have this VLDB or something, it is then I think it is known that these are the good ones. And I don't really have an idea how to get this information from any page or something. And I don't know right now if ACM or DBLP have a feature like that. 

investigator: Okay. I think this might conclude question four, if you have nothing else that you want to throw in regarding this one? 

blue_dog: No, I don't think there's anything left. 


### Thank you ###


investigator: Okay. Then you can click the button to go further. 

blue_dog: I can only send right now. 

investigator: Yes. Send, send, send. 

blue_dog: So yes. Yes, it just says the audio recording has stopped.
