Proceedings of the 1st ACM international workshop on Communicability design and evaluation in cultural and ecological multimedia system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interactive communication through multimedia systems has opened new horizons inside the global village defined by McLuhan. Advances in software, hardware, and telecommunications linked to design are enabling millions of people to share greater content in multimedia devices of smaller size and costs. Now, the real success of a multimedia product, commercial or not, lies in the communicability of that content. Communicability that is not synonymous with usability and which entails the notion of quality. Inside that global village, human beings create content that runs through both on-line and off-line multimedia systems in a myriad of sites that refer to the present, the future and the past. This diachronic interactive vision favours the promotion of cultural patrimony, for instance. A patrimony immersed in nature. Therefore, a bidirectional relationship must exist between cultural and ecological heritage. An excellent example is Vancouver city and the Canadian nation where our workshop takes place. The symbiosis between new technologies and respect for nature in an endless number of cases is perfect. The purpose of the current workshop is not only to try to set down the theoretical bases for the notion of communicability as a result of the intersection of the formal and fact sciences, but also a series of theoretical-practical examples will make it possible to know the state of the arts in design, the assessment of quality of the multimedia systems aimed at the promotion of cultural and natural heritage, the drawing of the profile of a new professional in the qualitative context of the multimedia systems, future trends in the net under the denomination of Web 3.0, heuristic analysis of the classical supports in multimedia aimed at tourism and entertainment, virtual museums, the nearness of the citizen to his/her local institutions, and quality in vocal communications through the internet, among so many other aspects which tend to increase the communicability, the design and the heuristic assessment of it, in the framework of ecological and cultural heritage of multimedia systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.047 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.003 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".