Comments for Who are the players in KM

Comment from Denham on 2004-02-08

2004-02-08T22:52:36Z

Thanks for the correction re Brint. This is a then citation network rather than a 'who is who' list of KM gurus.

I'm always taken by suprise at the range and depth of KM. Quite difficult to track folks who do not appear on the KM conference roster and publish in OD or OL journals.

Comment from Valdis on 2004-02-10

2004-02-11T00:50:15Z

Citation networks eliminate those KM gurus who do not publish -OR- those that publish in the non-academic press.

How about Google Numbers? Not totally scientific, but a good ROM, they include both authors and not. IMHO a Google Number > 4000 reveals a KM thought leader.

See... http://www.hr.com/hrcom/general/pf.cfm?oID=5635CFB8-953A-4776-AAD8B1E1404DC46F

Comment from Wil Holland on 2005-02-10

2005-02-11T00:54:41Z

Would you consider this? Passing the Test? For over ten years, I have been working on a method of semantic interpretation that applies in any situation. Using this method, I believe that a software program can pass the Turing Test. The book, "How to Design a Universal Artificial Intelligence," is currently online, in its entirety, and I am requesting your review of this work. This is it; this is real; this is a working counterpart program. http://universalartificialintelligence.com

Website

Email