MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1585506486 · doi:10.4000/cybergeo.22849

Usability evaluation for a web-based public participatory GIS: A case study in Canmore, Alberta

2011· article· en· W1585506486 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCybergeo · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic participation GISUsabilityParticipatory GISWorld Wide WebComputer scienceWeb usabilityContext (archaeology)Geographic information systemCitizen journalismHuman–computer interactionGeographyGIS and public health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on evaluating usability of a Web-based Public Participatory GIS (Web-PPGIS) in the context of a real-world application. The empirical study involves the use of ArgooMap to support users in an online public participatory decision-making process where the users are asked to find the “best” location for a new parkade in the downtown of Canmore, Alberta. The datasets on system usability have been collected automatically using UsaProxy software. We have found that there are significant differences in the system usability among the participants. The system usability is higher for users with GIS experience, higher education levels, and more web surfing experience. The findings provide insights for Web-PPGIS practitioners to advance such systems. It is noticed that the way the Web-PPGIS website was advertised may influence the results. An approach to avoid this problem is needed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.247
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.143 · 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