Caroline Guibet
email: caroline.guibet-lafaye@ens.fr

Lafaye Philosophy

Maurice Centre

Halbwachs

Institutionalization of Social Justice and Constitutionalization of Socio-economic Equality

Liberalism, in its different forms, takes into account some positive but limited requirements of mutual assistance which, in a democratic society, are institutionalized and implemented by laws. This requirement of impartiality has been implemented by the increase of public functions of mutual assistance, by the development of the welfare State and by the social democratic alternative of liberal theory. 2 However and although the liberal State tends towards a conciliation of the requirements of impartiality and of the requirements of individuality, it remains unsatisfactory. Liberal societies impose a limited impartiality, obtained by means of institutions which require of their members a specific attachment to certain rights and to certain procedures. This task is indeed easier to implement than the institutionalization of a more levelling system. However we would like to determine up to which point and in which conditions it is possible to establish rights to a social minimum in addition to the rights to fundamental liberties and to legal and political equality guaranteed to all. 3 From there, it would be possible to constitutionalize the elimination of poverty, through a set of limited dispositions that the legislative and executive authorities would be legally charged to implement, through specific programmes. If these measures can escape from political bargaining and from interested calculations, a first step towards a more global socio-economic equality would be made. Thus we would like, in the following developments, to consider the conditions of a social and political system, which satisfy the requirements of impartiality more than liberalism does, even in its more equalitarian versions. In the same way, we would like to specify the means of a progressive institutionalization of socio-economic equality.

1 48, bd Jourdan, F-75014 Paris (France). Contact :

1-Moral conditions for the institutionalization of socio-economic equality

The implementation of socio-economic equality, through a legislative programme and through the ordinary methods of a democratic policy, as the "constitutionalization" of socio-economic equality, suppose an adequate division of the reasons and of the motives between the sphere of the individual, the sphere of the personnal and the sphere of the impersonal. It is necessary, on the one hand, to ensure to each one a coherent way of life, enabling her to pursue her personal goals while respecting the impersonal reasons in her public life. The institutionalization of a more levelling socio-economic system will be supported by the individuals, only if its institutions and its conventions are psychologically viable and only if these institutions produce customs, habits and practices. However the individual moral attitude, regarding policies aiming at more equality, can change, collectively, only by the development of practices, which will allow individuals to follow priorities and values which are not only personal but which will modify their perception of themselves.

A second stage of the realization of an egalitarian ideal supposes the recognition of a negative responsibility of society with regard to the inequalities, in particular, inequalities in income, wealth, social position, health, education which society allows. Deciding to defend and apply only rights associated with a system of laissez-faire constitutes a choice made by the State. It supports a system which remunerates individuals, having the strongest capacity to produce -as their heirs -, at the expense of the individuals who have a weaker capacity to produce 4 . The justification of such a social and political choice is based on a specific account of equalitarian impartiality. It rests on arguments in favour or against inequalities. It is thus necessary to put forward criteria and measures of justice which answer the requirements of equity and which could reduce these inequalities, while avoiding irreducible resistance from the members of the community. These principles must be able to enter within a vast plurality of individual conceptions of good life.

In this aim, it is advisable to establish institutions serving an egalitarian ideal of impartiality without requiring these institutions an excessive impartiality of individuals. This point of view, as P. Ricoeur underlines it, raises the question of knowing "up to which point the principles of justice -and singularly the second principle [of justice of Rawls] -can […] exert the role of a guiding idea […] in regard to justice as a social practice?". 5 In the same spirit, Joshua Cohen and Joel Rogers defended a "democratic principle of legitimacy" which would integrate, without being subjected to majority 4 Then the latter are deprivated of what they could have had in another system. The State, and consequently the citizens, are responsible for this result. 5 "Jusqu'à quel point les principes de justice -et singulièrement le second [principe de justice de Rawls] -peuvent […] exercer le rôle d'idée directrice […] à l'égard de la justice en tant que pratique sociale?" (Ricoeur 1991: 188). revision, the requirement that the institutions satisfy the Rawlsian difference principle (see Cohen and Rogers 1983: 158-161). 6 Thus the institutionalization of social justice could, for example, follow the way of a constitutionalization of the difference principle. Some substantial rules of justice, concerning for example the freedom of religion, have already been integrated in the institutions. Legal, civic and political equality, for example, are guaranteed by the Constitution and escape from the influence of human arguments and from political interference. In the same way, many constitutions of the Western industrialized countries enshrine social rights, such as rights to unemployment insurance, right to paid-holidays and right to social security. 7 Consequently, one can plan to integrate in the constitution, in accordance with this model, social rights supporting a socio-economic equality. In this perspective, a specific development of the Rawlsian criterion of justice is necessary. It will give a reasonably precise idea of the institutional reforms that this criterion, for a particular institutional system, would require if it were entirely defined. 8

2-Difficulties associated to an institutionalization of a socio-economic equality

Nevertheless the constitutionalization of these objectives presents several difficulties. The institutionalization of social justice, indeed, depends on the economic organization of society and, particularly, of private and public property. It also depends on tax system, inheritance, gifts and transfers of money. This means that the realization of a levelling socio-economic constitution which would integrate, by assumption, certain economic and social rights, as through a politico-legal constitution encounters difficulties. Indeed, it is not only a question of guaranteeing to all members of the society some specific rights, relatively well defined, but to guarantee to all members of the community medical care, education, decent housing, unemployment insurance, family benefits, retirement pensions and even a minimum income. Our prospect is in fact an extension of the specific rights, guaranteed to all, beyond fundamental freedoms and legal and political equality, towards a social minimum, in order to eliminate poverty, by constitutional means that the legislative and executive authorities would be question of proper rate of saving over time, the question of the background institutions of taxation and property, are mentioned by Rawls as belonging to the moral problems of political economy (see 1971 (ed. 2003): 234). 7 In Canada there were a significant social movement aiming at adding to the constitution a "social charter which would guarantee the right to health system, social assistance and education (Kymlicka and Norman 1992: 1-2). This charter was defended by 85% of Canadians and 88% of Québécois. 8 T. Pogge suggests that "Rawls's criterion can be used to design a blueprint of ideal institutions that would be perfectly just. But much more important for now is its role in the comparative assessment of alternative feasible institutional schemes " (1989: 12). legally charged to implement through specific programmes.

a) Human and psychological difficulties

The implementation of principles of equality, in a socio-economic field, involve, firstly, difficulties due to human nature and to human psychology. More specifically, these difficulties concern, personal motivation and choices, and first of all the desire to acquire. These personal reasons constrain the pursuit of a global equalitarian ideal, even if this prospect is supported by a real political design. Even within liberal societies, the most favoured individuals -i.e. not only the rich minority, but a majority of individuals who are not poor -tend to slow down the pursuit of socio-economic equality, beyond a relatively modest level. Whereas during the XX th century in particular, attitudes with regard to racial or sexual discrimination have changed, on the other hand, social attitudes towards economic inequality, except extreme poverty, remain the same. The winners of economic competition, the heirs of a fortune or of an advantageous social position tend to think that they have been lucky or that they deserve their advantages. In the majority of cases, they do not conceive that they enjoy benefits of badly acquired profits or that they enjoy profits whose origin sullies their reputation, in particular when they are inherited advantages. The recognition of the legitimacy of a redistributive system, of which part of the contributors seem to be the victims, supposes that the holders of high incomes owe their fortune in respect to historical contingencies, much more than to their own qualities, their own choices or to their personal efforts. The way in which a person earns her money, in a competing economy, where equal opportunity is not forced by the traditional forms of discrimination, seems seldom illegitimate from the winners' point of view. It is, generally, conceived that these inequalities are justified in an external way. The recipients of this system imagine that they legitimately have natural capacities and assets, due to their education and to their social condition, and which they have exploited well. 9 The creation of stable egalitarian institutions, however, requires that these attitudes change. Thus the resistance induced by the implementation of socio-economic equality can be overcome, for example, if the conventional institutional structures, which work in favour of the common and public good in a morally acceptable way, penetrate more to the heart of individual life. Thus we can suppose that the more general the common good that the political system aims to implement is, the more the pursuit of this goodin particular if this good is conceived in levelling terms -will escape from the contrary influences of democratic politics (e.g. Nagel 1991: 95). In the same way, the priority given to the worst-off, in the socio-economic field, can constitute a basis for public policy. This requirement can guide debates concerning social and economic policy. However these debates aim at a consensus between the partners, since "so long as there was sufficient agreement among the members of a society about the implications of social justice, these might be embodied in specific substantive rules and incorporated in the constitution" (Barry 1995: 96).

b) Difficulties of an economic nature

Moreover, the institutionalization of social justice supposes to solve economic difficulties. Economic life is narrowly dependent on incentives and economic stimulations. The realization of a structure, in which economic inequalities are reduced, must be compatible with the preservation of productivity. The legal and economic structures, able to implement, constitutionally, socio-economic equality must preserve individuality and economic efficiency. Efficiency certainly constitutes an argument which cannot be neglected. Nevertheless and from an ethical point of view, the pursuit of the greatest profitability and of the highest productivity, whatever the cost, cannot constitute a priority principle.

c) Difficulties relating to the implementation of social justice

The constitutionalization of social justice -which is a fundamental stage of the realization of socio-economic equality -must finally face difficulties related to its implementation. Indeed, it is not sufficient that an agreement between the social partners registers, in the constitution, rights ensuring social justice between all the members of the community. In fact, we can legitimately expect that there are various opinions concerning the best real social arrangement (i.e. the best calculated arrangement) and the arrangement the most able to privilege the worst-off. Rawls underlines that tax legislation and laws on property belong to the field of the "essential constitutional questions" and belong to the field of justice as equity. They are subject to a reasonable disagreement, concerning the implications of principles of justice. 10 In the same way, B. Barry suggests that social justice is not able to determine the question whatever legislation is just or unjust, especially in connection with economic and social policies, is commonly subject to reasonable differences of opinion.

[…] Often the best that we can say of a law or policy is that it is at least not clearly unjust. The application of the difference principle in a precise way normally requires more information that we can expect to have and, in any case, more than the application of the first principle" (1971: 174). There is nothing incoherent here with the assessment that the principles of justice must leave open a fair result, in a more radical way. The main difficulty consists in applying the difference principle, that is to decide which laws and which policies would be, actually, most advantageous, in terms of primary goods for the worst off group.

level or organisation of health, education or social security provision. In the modern societies, social justice requires that all the requirements related to these fields be satisfied. Nevertheless variations and modifications are possible. 11 In spite of the mobility of labour and capital and in spite of the free exchange of goods and services, collective decisions can be made about laws concerning the security of employment, environment and social wages.

It is true, however, that the concept of social justice cannot establish, by itself, a single response to the encountered difficulties. Indeed, there is no conventional element of agreement able to determine the distribution of income and the distribution of health care, for example. In the case of public services, it can be admitted that justice concerns, initially, the way in which funds are obtained and the way in which services are distributed between the potential beneficiaries. However the level of the expenditure depends, to a certain extent and legitimately, on what citizens agree to pay for, that is, it depends on the "willingness to pay". 12 Brian Barry suggests that if we do not attribute to the courts of justice the interpretative authority of the difference principle -or of any other principle of distributive justice -it seems difficult to imagine a specific formula, establishing a progressive taxation on incomes or an inheritance tax, that can be set in constitution. 13 Thus and even if the difference principle would sustain a broad consensus, it appears that its concrete implementation will cause dissension.

3-Circumstances of impartiality

However, these conflicts can be avoided under several conditions. They depend, in particular, on the conditions of the decision-making processes and of the selection of the principles of justice. Indeed the procedures best able to encourage just laws and fair policies are those which respect the conditions of the original position described by Thomas Scanlon. 14 This original position supposes that people are well informed, pursue their own interests and their own conception of the good, but are able to 11 For example the French people can choose to privilege education instead of pensioners, whereas the Germans can decide to support the retirements while being less generous in regards to education. These divergences reflect collective preferences and distinct social choices. 12 See B. Barry analysis concerning the expertise on the value, starting from the implementation of the Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) founded on the "willingness to pay" (WTP) and the "willingness to accept" (WTA) (1995: 153 and sqq.). 13 The courts of justice can intervene to implement principles of social justice. However, they cannot initiate governmental programs nor have a systematic sight on governmental policies neither. This practical problem is not the only one. The achievement of social justice aims implies expenditure. However the courts of justice have not the capacity to control the budget distribution neither to orientate tax allocation nor to make decisions regarding the level of expenditure, within a country or a State. 14 See Guibet Lafaye 2005: ch. 3. recognize and acknowledge the reasonable objections formulated by others. The institutional framework guarantees equality between the partners. Each one has a right of veto on the proposals which he cannot reasonably reject. The hypothetical conditions thus described draw the circumstances of justice. Thus "we may define the circumstances of impartiality as the conditions under which the substantive rules of justice of a society will tend actually to be just" (Barry 1995: 100). 15 Indeed the circumstances of impartiality not only lead to justice but are, in themselves, intrinsically fair. They describe the conditions under which a principle of justice can be applied.

Within the conditions able to produce a broad disposition that can accept the force of reasonable objections, we can add to these circumstances of justice the requirement to hold the citizens equal, in a fundamental sense. This principle allows that an objection can never be rejected, for the sole reason that it was formulated by a member of a minority (see Barry 1995: 102-103). In a situation where all the participants are well informed and where their interests are expressed with the same force, a good argument does not depend on the social identity of its defender. Equity is respected when the process aims and leads to a consensus. On the other hand, when this consensus is not possible, each partner is equally treated, if a voice in a vote is granted to her, for example. However this condition is not sufficient.

It is also necessary -and this is an additional condition -to establish a policy, such that the arguments are weighted and in which the best argument win, rather than a policy where only count the votes and the majority vote. Each participant must be able, within this process of decision-making, to defend his own conception of the good and to convince the others that their conceptions, well understood, amount to the same position as his position. In this way we can also consider the manner in which public policies can be provided, in a neutral way, in comparison with the various conceptions of good life. 16 Incontestably, there are also precise rules of decision, specifying the way in which the election of a Parliament or a voting procedure for legislation within the Parliament must proceed. Governmental laws and governmental policies cannot be respected and have validity only if they result from a process of "open justifications openly arrived at" (Macedo 1991: 69). 17 Legislation, for example, must be founded on a process of consultation, during which the individuals and the groups concerned have sufficient time to formulate proposals and comments, sufficient time to be heard and to take part criticized by Joseph Raz (1986: 110-162), Jeremy Waldron (1989: 61-83), and Stephen Mulhall and Adam Swift (1992: 29-32 in particular). Although Dworkin recognized the requirement of such a field, he did not demonstrate, in a precise way, how public policies could be followed while respecting the neutrality of procedures. The arguments used in favour of allowances indexed on the resources (i.e. rights, money, etc.) rather than on utility, are related to the distribution of private goods (Dworkin 1981a and 1981b). 17 Consequently social justice is guaranteed in the framework of such procedures.

into the process of rational evaluation. A law which results from this procedure is justifiable and can be actually defended. Thus these requirements -which are empirical -concern the procedure more than the substantive and positive principles of justice. Nevertheless, when they are respected, there is a lower likelihood of ending up with unjust legislation than when these requirements are not respected. The constitutional requirements, the institutions of education, the organization of mass media and of communication provide the conditions under which the decisions taken respect the circumstances of impartiality. Thus the possibility of guaranteeing social justice rests on the circumstances of impartiality. In a general way, "a just constitution must be set up in such a way that all decisions are taken in ways that instantiate the circumstances of impartiality" (Barry 1995: 110).

However as Rawls underlines it, public reason works as a norm of impartial justification, whose limits concerning the decision-making process "do not apply [however] to all political questions but only to those involving what we called the 'constitutional essential' and questions of basic justice" (Rawls 1993: 204; see also § 5). By contrast, much tax legislation and many laws regulating property, statues protecting the environment and controlling pollution, establishing national parks and preserving wilderness areas and animal and plant species, and laying aside funds for museums and arts do not belong to these fundamental matters. Thus Rawls distinguishes two kinds of objects. The first -tax legislation and laws on property -belong to the field of justice as equity but are subject to a reasonable dissension, concerning the implications of principles of justice. The second category of objects -i.e. the rest of the list -concerns questions which cannot be solved without giving priority to one conception of the good rather to another. The requirement of impartial justification is satisfied, in this case, only if the procedure, in accordance with which decisions are made, is fair and if the policy is fairly accomplished. Thus the taxes financing public expenditure must be raised according to fair methods. Indeed, against such measures -or against all other policies -, one cannot maintain the fact that this disposition is appropriate for those which defend such conception of the good, but not for those which defend another conception of the good. It is thus necessary to require that the procedures by which decisions of courts -and, more generally, decisions concerning the social contextrespect the fairness of the decision process. When justice exists, the fairness of the procedure adds a value to that which the fair and impartial decision has by itself. Even when the decision taken would be perfectly just, it is essential that the method by which the decision is taken is not unjust or inequitable. Indeed, when people are not satisfied with a decision, they are nevertheless more able to accept it, if this decision was taken at the end of a fair procedure. 18 When the justice of a decision is doubtful -as it is often the case -the equity of the procedure which conduces to it makes it more acceptable. Within the framework of a convenient original position, fair procedures will be allowed, not only because they lead to just decisions but also because the equity of the process, leading to these decisions, will make them more acceptable. In many cases, justice as impartiality can specify that the decision must be made in accordance with a fair procedure.

In this way the conditions under which a political system can introduce measures contributing to an institutionalization of socio-economic equality are specified. Indeed principles of justice and political decisions, which respect the requirements of impartiality and thus reflect their neutrality, could satisfy the conditions of an integration of the just within a plurality of conceptions of the good life and also satisfy the citizens' requirements for principles of social justice. These principles suppose, in particular, that the rules implemented in the decision-making process should not favour any particular conception of the good -against other conceptions -nor should they be defended by appealing to any other particular conception of the good.

The realization of a greater social justice within our institutions would require a specification of the transition which would lead towards fairer social institutions. In this way we will contribute to the reform of existing social institutions so as to render them more just. It will, secondly, help to improve the situation of the worst-off. This transition will finally require us to accept certain constraints upon our conduct and policies. 19 The implementation of a project of social justice requires a reflection about the existing social institutions, the roles and functions involved in these institutions, taken as a single system. This reflection will allow the identification of feasible alternative systems, by taking into account the social context in which we nowadays act. It seems, however, that the most plausible approach to an institutionalization of social justice is to proceed by a constitutionalization of the difference principle. agreement, we cannot hope to find consensus on the basis of any other substantive criterion". On the other hand one can suppose that in an adapted original position, people will be concerned by the accuracy and the equity of the procedures of decisions-making. "Generalizing the point, we may say that, where substantive justice falls short, the search for agreement has to be pushed up to the procedural level" (Barry 1995: 109-110). 19 This is our own responsibility in front of the existing injustices and this shall not depend on whatever an institutional system entirely just is feasible or not.

This question and more particularly, the question of the level of a social minimum, as well as the

The corresponding attitude, concerning advantages due to a dominant race or due to gender, is not any more acceptable nowadays.

In a theory of justice, it is the only source of authorized indetermination. Rawls stresses that "the

The concept of "rules of justice" gives here an account of moral rules as well of legal rules.

See Barry 1995: 143. This interpretation of a field of neutrality was advocated by R.Dworkin and

By hypothesis we are in presence of conflicting conceptions of the good. The individuals cannot thus assert that the adequate criterion, within several principles of justice, is the one which manages the best to carry out the good. Consequently "where justice is unavailable to provide the basis of


Karel Boonstra
email: karel.boonstra@hu.nl

Embodied abstraction in geometry learning in grades 5 to 6

Keywords: Embodied design, design research, geometry, abstraction

To explain, interpret and distinguish the large diversity of visual information and spatial phenomena in today's world, children need to be able to grasp and understand the underlying mathematical and geometrical structures. Relating these real-life spatial phenomena with their underlying geometrical characteristics can be regarded as abstraction, one of the core aspects of mathematical thinking according to [START_REF] Drijvers | Denken over wiskunde, onderwijs en ICT[END_REF]. How to foster the process of abstraction in geometry in primary school is the central question of my research. Practical and theoretical perspectives on geometry and abstraction, together with the theoretical lens of embodied cognition, led to design criteria for activities fostering abstraction in geometry. Accordingly, activities on mirroring for students from grade 5 to 6 have been designed, based on an embodied abstraction approach.

Theoretical background and research question

Geometry education in the Netherlands is characterized by a realistic approach, described by [START_REF] Freudenthal | Mathematics as an Educational Task[END_REF] as grasping space, "the space that the child must learn to know, explore, conquer, in order to live, breathe and move better in it" (p. 403). It encompasses problems, tasks and activities experienced in our direct surrounding, with the aim of learning about mathematical objects and concepts.

Based on the definition of abstraction by [START_REF] Dreyfus | Abstraction in Mathematics Education[END_REF], as the attempt to reach an understanding of the structure of a mathematical concept, and the notion of reflective abstraction by [START_REF] Piaget | The Equilibration of Cognitive Structures[END_REF] the process of abstraction in geometry can be regarded as the discovery and formalizing of new (to the learner) mathematic structures in spatial orientation through a process of reflection on experiences and explorations.

The theoretical lens of embodied cognition is used in this study for an embodied approach of abstraction in geometry. Embodied cognition theory emphasizes that all cognition is rooted in bodily experience; in the interaction of the body with the physical environment [START_REF] Abrahamson | Embodiment and embodied design[END_REF]. The definition of abstraction in geometry through the lens of embodied cognition that is used for the design reads: the process of describing, explaining, reflecting on, and structuring of action in the experienced world using mathematical artifacts. The design principles for the learning environment have their origin in action-based embodied design, one of the design genres introduced by [START_REF] Abrahamson | The Future of Embodied Design for Mathematics Teaching and Learning[END_REF]. In action-based design: "participants … tackle motor-control problems: they are assigned the task of performing a technologically mediated manipulation of material or virtual objects, in an attempt to achieve a specified goal state." (p. 5). The research question we try to answer with this design is: how can embodied activities in geometry contribute to the process of abstraction by children in grades 5-6.

The study can be characterized as a design study (Bakker, 2018). During a series of design cycles, a learning environment on embodied tasks on mirroring is developed and tested. Criteria for the environment are outlined in a design table and based on the definition of the process of abstraction (see above) and elements of embodied design: enactment, expected verbalizing, degrees of freedom, and attentional anchors. The tasks focus on the geometrical properties of mirroring: perpendicularity, equidistance and angle of incidence begin equal to the angle of reflection. This is done using a seethrough mirror, chess pieces and a laser pointer. The designs are tested during task-based interviews with 8 individual children from grade 5 and 6. The interviews, which took 30 minutes on average, are video-taped. Data are in the process of analysis in a bottom-up theory-guided coding process.

Results

During acting, all students discovered the correct position (equal distance to the mirror and on a straight line perpendicular to the mirror) of the chess pieces on either side of the see-through mirror. When explaining their solutions, they showed an understanding of equal distances of object and reflection image. Several students were able to write a clear instruction, including a drawing, of how to position the chess pieces, thus showing promising steps in the process of abstraction. Although they showed an understanding of the need of perpendicularity, they still struggled with the abstraction hereof.

Conclusion

This embodied design shows mixed, but also promising, results in fostering abstraction in the designed tasks on mirroring. More work is needed to further investigate embodied design in this and other areas of geometry.


Kushagra Singh Bisen

Sara Assefa Alemayehu

Pierre Maret

Alexandra Creighton

Rachel Gorman

Bushra Kundi

Thumeka Mgwgwi

Fabrice Muhlenbach

Serban Dinca-Panaitescu

Christo El Morr

Evaluation of Search Methods on Community Documents

Keywords: Meta-Data, Domain-Specific Documents, Question Answering, Information Retrieval, UEQ, Human-Computer Interaction

à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

Introduction

Search for domain-specific information is tough on the web. Search engine usually returns a response from pages which are popular and indexed above. Communities with an interest in a particular domain often find results which are not relevant to their query searching on the web. For instance, this is the case for activists in disability and human rights advocacy groups. This community, as well as many other distributed communities, need domain-specific repositories where they will have more chances to find the information they are searching for. These data and document repositories may implement a different mechanism for accessing the information. Moreover, the questions asked by stakeholders in a project can utilise the meta-data, the document's content or both. Therefore, there is a need for an evaluation of methods that can be employed for searching over community data and documents. In this paper, we present an evaluation of search techniques available over domain-specific document corpus. The paper is organised as follows, In section 2, we describe the existing work done in this direction. In section 3, we explain the experiment we conducted and the evaluation methods. We further show the results in section 4.2. We conclude and point to future work in the section 5

Related Work

The evaluation of search methods generally concentrates on the performance of the search mechanism: calculation of precision, recall, and F-Measure. Benchmarks have been proposed for this kind of task. Apart from the quality of the search method, it is also important to provide the user with an efficient search experience to retrieve the information in the corpus. Therefore, there is a need for evaluating the quality of the user search experience when searching for information. And this is especially necessary because of the emergence and popularity of new search techniques such as Elastic search [START_REF] Kononenko | Mining modern repositories with elasticsearch[END_REF] [26], Question Answering over free text [3] [6] [4] [START_REF] Bardhan | Drugehrqa: A question answering dataset on structured and unstructured electronic health records for medicine related queries[END_REF], and Question Answering over knowledge graphs [8] [9] [27] [START_REF] Zheng | Question answering over knowledge graphs: Question understanding via template decomposition[END_REF]. The search techniques are one-field one-shot search i.e users retrieve information by building a question/query through only a text field and receive the answer in response. There have been end user evaluations on semantic web to improve the human-semantic web interaction [START_REF] Mccool | End-user evaluations of semantic web technologies[END_REF] [START_REF] García | Improving human-semantic web interaction: The rhizomer experience[END_REF]. There are various methods for evaluating a method such as Concept Testing [START_REF] Moore | Concept testing[END_REF], Heuristic Evaluation [START_REF] Nielsen | How to conduct a heuristic evaluation[END_REF] and User Experience Evaluation [START_REF] Arnold Pos Vermeeren | User experience evaluation methods: current state and development needs[END_REF]. We need to adapt the evaluation of user experience to the search methods. To the best of our knowledge, there has been no user experience evaluation on search methods over community documents.

Description of an Evaluation Environment for Search Methods

In this section, we describe the environment prepared to experiment with and evaluate the search methods on community documents. In the subsection 3.1 we describe the search methods we compare and in the subsection 3.2 we describe the experiment.

Search Methods

QAnswer over Knowledge Graphs. QAnswer KG [START_REF] Diefenbach | Qanswer kg: Designing a portable question answering system over rdf data[END_REF] is a search engine over RDF datasets with which users can search information with both questions as well as keywords. The data stored in a knowledge graph can be exported as a triple pattern for QAnswer KG. The input query is expanded and n-grams from the query are mapped with the properties and resources. The properties and resources are used to generate possible SPARQL queries by combining the triples which share a variable. The queries are ranked with a machine-learning model and the query with the highest confidence is chosen as the response to the user's input.

Elastic Search over Documents. Elastic Search over Documents (ESDoc) Elastic Search [START_REF] Gormley | Elasticsearch: the definitive guide: a distributed real-time search and analytics engine[END_REF] is a JSON based full-text search engine capable to search over big data in a real-time fashion. Elastic Search can be used out of the box, although some users prefer to tweak parameters. Elastic Search is built over Apache Lucene, a java library. The elastic search uses algorithms such as okapi bm25 and NMSLIB to return a relevant document in response to the query. An elastic search system's architecture is composed of [START_REF] Kuc | Elasticsearch server[END_REF] -Document for storing an entity, it has an identifier and is part of an index where it is stored. They can be separated over multiple nodes. -Node is an instance of elastic search active for a query. Connected active nodes are referred to as a cluster. -Shards are used to improve efficiency through processing in parallel by further dividing the index into shards. Shards are often stored as Replicas to provide throughput of the data for efficiency in search.

QAnswer Search over Documents. QAnswer Search over Documents (QADoc) employs RoBERTa [START_REF] Liu | Roberta: A robustly optimized bert pretraining approach[END_REF] for question answering over the document corpus. The documents are uploaded, split into paragraphs and pre-processed. The questions to the documents are answered with the content of the document.

Experiment

Search Instruction Questionnaire. An experiment was conducted where the candidates were requested to search for domain-specific information as illustrated in the table 2. The instructions provided are search-method agnostic. We did not propose questions but rather proposed search instructions to which a user can formulate the question by himself in a search technique. The reason was to prevent biases that could arise by providing questions to search the method, as the methods are different in their implementation. For example, telling the users to search for "keyword1, keyword2, keyword3 " will work in keyword-based elastic search but could not be good in other search methods. The candidates used each search method listed in the section 3.1 to search for the domainspecific information. The candidates have presented a questionnaire with the search instructions with a 7-point Likert Scale [START_REF] Joshi | Likert scale: Explored and explained[END_REF] from -3 to 3 (the higher the better) to record the relevancy of the information retrieved, as per the user. We present 6 search instructions to the candidate of which 5 are True i.e there is any information related to the instruction in the community document corpus and 1 is False i.e there is no information related to the instruction in the community document corpus (see Table 1). The candidates use a stopwatch to record the time they spent searching for the information. The candidates are instructed to stop searching if more than 2 minutes are spent and further record that they didn't find an answer. The candidates are also instructed to record if they found an answer with three scales which are yes, no and maybe. We chose two minutes as a threshold for search as the search method should be able to provide an answer in that time, if not the search method is not considered efficient.

User Experience Questionnaire The second questionnaire presented to the candidate after each search method was a user experience questionnaire (UEQ) [START_REF] Laugwitz | Construction and evaluation of a user experience questionnaire[END_REF]. We choose UEQ as it provides a benchmark to classify the values obtained from the result.The objective of UEQ is to allow a quick assessment done by end users covering a preferably comprehensive impression of user experience. It should allow users to express feelings, impressions and attitudes that arise when experiencing the search method under investigation simply and immediately [START_REF] Schrepp | Design and evaluation of a short version of the user experience questionnaire (ueq-s)[END_REF]. We employ the standard version of UEQ which contains 26 items. The items are divided into 6 scales. The 6 scales focus on different experience aspects of the search method:

-Attractiveness: Signifying the overall impression of the search method.

-Perspicuity: Describing if it is easy to get familiar with the search method and if it is easy to understand. -Efficiency: Describing if the search method is fast to provide them with information.

-Dependability: Describing if the user feels confident while using the search method.

-Stimulation: Describing if the user finds the search method exciting and motivating. -Novelty: Describing if the user finds the search method innovative and creative.

We use the UEQ scales to find how the candidates feel about the attractiveness of the search method (with the scale Attractiveness), the usefulness of the search method i.e Pragmatic Value (employing the scales Perspicuity, Efficiency and Dependability), the ease of use of the search method i.e Hedonic Value (employing the scales Stimulation and Novelty)

4 Experimental Results

Domain of Experiment

The communities working for disability rights advocacy require better information access [START_REF] Loeb | Disability statistics: an integral but missing (and misunderstood) component of development work[END_REF] [1]. In the domain of healthcare, the stakeholders perform a variety of search tasks like literature reviews, scoping reviews, rapid evidence reviews and systematic reviews [START_REF] Collins | The production of quick scoping reviews and rapid evidence assessments: a how to guide[END_REF]. The domain of the documents employed in the experiment is disability studies. The motivation to choose disability studies documents was to provide a better search experience for the disability documents in the WikiDisability Project [START_REF] Gorman | The potential of an artificial intelligence for disability advocacy: The wikidisability project[END_REF]. We search over the disability documents which are annotated with the Disability Wiki Website

Results of the Experiment

The value for UEQ scales are described in the table 4. We further compare the search methods with an ANOVA test [START_REF] Cuevas | An anova test for functional data[END_REF] on each 6 sub-scale of UEQ for the 17 candidates. However, there was a statistically significant difference between the groups as determined by One-Way ANOVA of the scales Perspicuity, Efficiency and Novelty. An ANOVA test signifies if there is an overall difference between the groups. We, therefore, perform a Tukey-Kramer Test [START_REF] Hj Keselman | The tukey multiple comparison test: 1953-1976[END_REF] to find out the differences between the groups. The results from the experiment are summarised as, -ESDoc provided the most relevant answers as per the candidates of the experiment, although it provided them with a false sense of information as the users found information for the instruction with no information available in the community corpus (see figure 1).

-For search instruction with information available in the document corpus, users found most information with ESDoc followed by QAnswer KG and QADoc. However, for the instruction with no information available, users found most information with ESDoc as well (see figure 2). -The values obtained from UEQ (see table 4) falls in the category of bad according to the UEQ benchmark [START_REF] Schrepp | Construction of a benchmark for the user experience questionnaire (ueq)[END_REF] -There were no statistically significant differences between the group means as determined by One-Way ANOVA of the scales Attractive, Dependability and Stimulation (see table 5) -There was a statistically significant difference between the groups as determined by One-Way ANOVA of the scales Perspicuity, Efficiency and Novelty.

(see table 5) -From Tukey-Kramer Test, we find that there is a significant difference between ESDoc vs QAnswer KG and ESDoc vs QADoc in the Perspicuity Scale. -There is a significant difference between ESDoc vs QADoc for both Novelty and Efficiency scale (see 6) -QADoc had the highest Hedonic Value i.e users found QADoc to be the most pleasant while interacting with it. It is followed by ESDoc and QAnswer KG.

(see figure 3) -QAnswer KG had the highest Pragmatic Value i.e users found QAnswer KG to be the most efficient and useful. It is followed by QADoc and ESDoc. (see figure 3) 3. Benchmark scores for classifying the experiences of users to the scales of UEQ [START_REF] Schrepp | Construction of a benchmark for the user experience questionnaire (ueq)[END_REF]. The scores obtained in the experiment belong to the scale bad.

Att

Scales

QAnswer 6. q tukey values for the scales showing a statistically significant difference. As there are three groups with the degree of freedom within groups being 46, the critical value for 3 groups, df = 46 for 5% significance level is 3.425 [START_REF] Kokoska | Critical values for the studentized range distribution[END_REF] Search Methods

Conclusion and future work

In the paper, we have presented the evaluation of search methods on domainspecific community document corpus based on the user experience. We found out that using Elastic search over the documents can provide relevant answers. Although, it also provided a false sense of relevancy of the information to the user for the search instruction with no information available in the document corpora. Thus, for non-exploratory question answering with an exact answer, we need more than the Elastic search technique. We find out that QADoc was the search method with perceived innovation by the users, but it did not perform as well as ESDoc or QAnswer KG for information retrieval. QAnswer KG was perceived as the most useful search method by the users. We conclude that we need to combine various search methods over community documents to provide a better search experience to the user. After conclusion, we developed a demo9 on the same document corpus where we combine the three search methods [START_REF] Singh Bisen | Wikibase as an Infrastructure for Community Documents: The example of the Disability Wiki Platform[END_REF] (manuscript under evaluation). We used wikibase as a knowledge graph to store data around the docment (the meta-data) and QADoc for data inside the document (the actual content). We introduced a fallback to other search methods in case the confidence of the response to the query is below a predefined threshold. In future, we have planned for a heuristic evaluation of the user interface for each search method to improve the search experience. We have also planned to introduce a new set of documents to the corpus and evaluate the search with the application where the search methods are combined.

Fig. 3 .

 3 Fig. 3. Pragmatic (i.e perceived use-fullness, efficiency) and Hedonic (i.e perceived innovation) values for the search methods

Table 1 .

 1 6 in the Disability Knowledge Graph 7 as well as in free-text in PDF to be searchable by Elastic Search3.1 and QAnswer Search over Documents 3.1. The table 2 describes the disability domain-specific search instructions given to the user. The search instructions, as well as the UEQ, were provided to the user in form of a response form 8 to be filled. The table shows the details related to the search instruction questionnaire experiment

	Documents Candidates Search Methods True Questions False Questions
	24	17	3	5	1
		Instruction to the User		Is answer available?
	Find text about the racism faced by black feminists	Yes
	Find text about elitism in american womens movement	Yes
	Find text about human rights of minors		No
	Find text about racism in United States		Yes
		Find text about ableism in prison		Yes
	Find text about police violence for disabled people	Yes

Table 2 .

 2 The table shows the search instructions given to the user for search with each method

  Excellent >= 1.75 >= 1.78 >= 1.9 >= 1.65 >= 1.55 >= 1.4 Good >= 1.52 >= 1.47 >= 1.56 >= 1.48 >= 1.31 >= 1.05 < 1.75 < 1.78 < 1.9 < 1.65 < 1.55 < 1.4 Above Avg >= 1.17 >= 0.98 >= 1.08 >= 1.14 >= 0.99 >= 0.71 < 1.52 < 1.47 < 1.56 < 1.48 < 1.31 < 1.05 Below Avg >= 0.7 >= 0.54 >= 0.64 >= 0.78 >= 0.5 >= 0.3

		.	Eff.	Per.	Dep.	Sti.	Nov.
		< 1.17 < 0.98 < 1.08 < 1.14 < 0.99 < 0.71
	Bad	< 0.7 < 0.54 < 0.64 < 0.78 < 0.5 < 0.3
	Table

Table 4 .

 4 The scores obtained from UEQ on different scales

		KG ESDoc QADoc
	Attractive	-0.272	-0.114 -0.433
	Perspicuity	-0.014	-1.205 -0.05
	Efficiency	-0.22	0.014 -0.583
	Dependability	-0.132	-0.014 -0.266
	Stimulation	-0.161	0.0588 -0.1
	Novelty	-0.088	-0.191 0.266

Table 5 .

 5 Values of F-Ratio and P-Value for One-Way Anova on the UEQ data for Search Methods

	Information Available	Information Not Available
	100
	75
	50
	25
	0
	QAnswer KG		ESDoc	QADoc
		Search Methods
	Fig. 2. Percentage of users who found an answer within 2 minutes with search methods
	on the instruction for which information was available and for the instruction informa-
	tion was not available
	Scale	Comparison Groups	q tukey
	Perspicuity QAnswerKG vs ESDoc 10.6742
		ESDoc vs QADoc	10.029
		QAnswerKG vs QADoc 0.306
	Efficiency QAnswerKG vs ESDoc 1.86
		ESDoc vs QADoc	4.579
		QAnswerKG vs QADoc 2.777
	Novelty QAnswerKG vs ESDoc 0.798
		ESDoc vs QADoc	3.439
		QAnswerKG vs QADoc 2.665
	Table

https://forms.gle/bjKqpdRGCuFSQFFG9

http://demo-disabilityrightsweb.univ-st-etienne.fr/