PerFail 2024, the Third International Workshop on Negative Results in Pervasive Computing, aims to emphasize sharing negative results, lessons learned, and experiences of failed experiments in the area of pervasive computing.As a negative result, we consider studies run correctly (in the light of the current state of the art) and in good practice but fail in terms of proof of the hypothesis or come up with no significance.The "badness" of the work can also come out as a properly but unfittingly designed data collection, an unconvincing evaluation, simulation, or lapses of hindsight in measurements.When presenting the negative results and lessons learned, we aim to prevent other researchers from working on similar problems to avoid certain pitfalls and avoid wasting time and energy on approaches that do not lead to fruitful results.With the workshop, we aim to provide a forum for discussions that are not only honest with "negative" results but also highlight possible steps that should be taken to avoid future failures.Overall, the workshop aims to facilitate researchers in all areas of pervasive computing with important insights into risks due to research methodology design choices.The workshop's international program committee refereed the submitted full papers by both the quality and their relevance to the workshop theme.In total, this workshop program includes six high-quality papers that were accepted after an arduous peer-review process.The program started with the first technical session with three paper presentations.After the coffee break, the workshop then resumed with the presentations of the remaining three papers, and concluded with the keynote of Prof. Dr. Janick Edinger (University of Hamburg) followed by a lively discussion.We want to
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ella Peltonen (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: