MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1661253376 · doi:10.51358/id.v11i1.243

Design de informação em interfaces digitais: origens, definições e fundamentos

2014· article· pt· W1661253376 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueInfoDesign - Revista Brasileira de Design da Informação · 2014
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Architecture and Usability
Canadian institutionsCégep de l'Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePhilosophyHumanitiesSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nos dias atuais, o design envolve a produção não só de objetos materiais, mas também de interfaces gráfico-digitais, com as quais o usuário interage no ciberespaço. Existem pontos de contato entre o design de informação e o design de interfaces, uma vez que ambas as disciplinas lidam com informações e signos. São identificados dois marcos para a origem do design de informação, ambos oriundos da década de 1930: o mapa das linhas de metrô de Londres, de autoria de Harry C. Beck, e o trabalho desenvolvido por Otto Neurath, que introduziu o método Isotype. Observa-se que diferentes definições para a disciplina ou campo de estudo destacam a importância do usuário no processo do design de informação. São apresentados seus fundamentos, a partir dos estudos de Bertin, Mijksenaar, Tufte e Redig. Percebe-se a necessidade de se atentar às possíveis estratégias para se reforçar, diferenciar e suportar conteúdos a serem apresentados aos usuários, seja em suporte físico ou digital.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0060.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.230 · 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