MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966316775 · doi:10.1177/154193120304700367

Ecological Interface Design for Network Management

2003· article· en· W1966316775 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pierre P. Duez, Kim J. Vicente

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicProduct Development and Customization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterface (matter)Fault managementComputer scienceAbstractionHierarchyNetwork interfaceNetwork managementFault (geology)Network monitoringMedical diagnosisUser interfaceDistributed computingComputer networkEngineeringOperating systemMedicineElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes an experimental investigation of Ecological Interface Design (EID) in computer network management. The constant potential for the addition and removal of devices, as well as change of configurations, makes this work domain more fluid than those previously studied under EID. Two interfaces were created for the University of Toronto campus network consisting of 220 nodes: a P interface based on existing design practices which presented primarily physical information and a P+F interface based on EID which presented both physical and functional information identified by an abstraction hierarchy analysis. Participants were required to use one of the two interfaces to detect and diagnose faults or disturbances in the network in real-time. Network size and fault load were both manipulated as within-participants variables. The P+F interface led to faster detection times, improved rates of detection under higher fault loads, and more accurate diagnoses under higher fault loads. These results suggest that the EID framework may lead to more robust monitoring in computer network management compared to existing interfaces.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.195 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicProduct Development and CustomizationFrench-language works237,207