MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W158310253

Proceedings of Graphics Interface 2006

2006· article· en· W158310253 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carl Gutwin, Stephen Mann

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUsability and User Interface Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer graphicsGraphicsComputer scienceInterface (matter)Web siteUser interfaceComputer graphics (images)Library scienceWorld Wide WebThe InternetOperating system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Welcome to Graphics Interface 2006. This annual conference, now in its 32nd year, is devoted to computer graphics, interactive systems, and human-computer interaction. Beginning in 1969 as the Canadian Man-Computer Communications Seminar (CMCCS), it is the oldest regularly-scheduled computer graphics and human-computer interaction conference. This year, Graphics Interface was held June 9--11, 2006 in Quebec, Quebec.A total of 94 submissions were received, of which 31 papers were accepted. The final program is balanced between HCI and computer graphics, with both tracks seeing similar acceptance rates: 17/44 for the HCI track, and 14/50 for the graphics track.The program committee consisted of 21 international experts, 18 of which attended the program committee meeting held in mid February at UBC. The great majority of papers recieved 5 reviews, two of which were from program committee members, and 3 from external reviewers.For further information about the conference series we invite you to visit the web site:http://www.graphicsinterface.org/

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.302
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3020.194

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations227
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUsability and User Interface DesignFrench-language works237,207