deletions | additions       diff --git a/conclusion.tex b/conclusion.tex  index b26407a..43281f6 100644  --- a/conclusion.tex  +++ b/conclusion.tex 
...
%  We began by surveying ``serendipity'', developing a broad historical  view, and describing  several criteria for serendipity  which are computationally feasible. Along  similar lines we propose  to be computationally salient. We reviewed related work; like  \citeA{andre2009discovery}, we propose a two-part definition of serendipity: \emph{discovery} followed by \emph{invention}. %  Adapting the ``Standardised Procedure for Evaluating Creative  Systems'' (SPECS) model, model from \citeA{jordanous:12},  we developed a set of evaluation standards for serendipity. %  We used this model to analyse prior examples of serendipity in the context of evolutionary music improvisation and recommender systems, and developed a thought experiment for expressing that seems able to support  ``high serendipity'' in with  a novel and computationally feasible design. design for a computational poetry workshop.  %  We then extracted several corollaries of reflected back over  our definition, which outline outlining  a programme for serendipitous computing in the pursuit of \emph{autonomy}, \emph{learning}, \emph{sociality}, and \emph{embedded evaluation}. We  posit the following challenges, which connect with ongoing discussions  in the field:  %  \begin{itemize}  \item \emph{A primary challenge to the serendipitous operation of  computers is developing computational agents that specify their own  problems.}  \item \emph{A second challenge is for computational agents to learn  more and more about the world we live in.}  \item \emph{A third challenge is for computational agents to interact  in a recognisably social way with us and with each other, resulting  in emergent effects.}  \item \emph{A fourth challenge is for computational agents to evaluate  their own creative process and products.}  \end{itemize}  %  In the current work, we have limited ourselves to clarifying conceptual issues surrounding our definition of serendipty,  and examining their  design implications. %   We indicate several possible further directions for implementation  work in each of our case studies. We have also drawn attention to  diff --git a/introduction.tex b/introduction.tex  index d2eaddf..fa46d27 100644  --- a/introduction.tex  +++ b/introduction.tex 
...
\ref{sec:computational-serendipity} applies our work to computational case studies and  to a thought experiment in computational serendipity. Section  \ref{sec:discussion} offers recommendations for researchers working in the computational modelling of serendipity and related areas such as computational creativity, and describes our own plans for future  work. Section \ref{sec:conclusion} reviews the contributions of this paper towards computational modelling and evaluation of serendipity. This section also clarifies the limitations of this our  work thus far and extracts key themes around which summarises the  fascinating challenges are posed in that await  future work research  on computational serendipity.