Atomic Protocol Questions specification and goalsCategorization theory and prototype/exemplar modelsTesting protocols: process character vs outcome testingWikipedia governance and credibility assessmentInteractive framework development for protocol questions

Participants: _vgr, ediblebadger, mtraven, suspencer_nit, simpalaxy, doriantaylor

The SIGFPT group held the second meeting on Atomic Protocols, led by ediblebadger. The main focus was reviewing and improving the specification of Atomic Protocol Questions through a new interactive framework to replace the current Roam page. The group discussed theoretical foundations for categorization, drawing on cognitive science literature around prototype and exemplar theory—moving beyond traditional necessary/sufficient condition models. References to Eleanor Rosch and Robert Nosofsky were highlighted as key theorists. The discussion also touched on practical methodological questions around testing protocols, distinguishing between testing process characteristics versus outcomes. Additionally, the group explored applying these concepts to real-world domains, with mtraven contributing research on Wikipedia governance and credibility assessment as a potential case study, noting the field already has substantial existing literature.

  • The group is transitioning from a Roam page to a more interactive system for triaging individual Atomic Protocol Questions with greater detail and engagement.
  • Prototype theory and exemplar theory from cognitive science (Eleanor Rosch, Robert Nosofsky) provide theoretical frameworks for understanding how to define and categorize protocols beyond traditional set-theoretic models.
  • A significant distinction exists between testing the character/process of protocols versus testing their outcomes, which has implications for protocol validation.
  • Existing work on Wikipedia governance is extensive, creating both opportunities and challenges for applying collaborative knowledge frameworks to protocol development.
View discussion in Discord →