MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971426047 · doi:10.1145/1142405.1142419

SESAME

2006· article· en· W1971426047 on OpenAlex
Jiyoung Oh, Wolfgang Stuerzlinger, John Danahy

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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSketchConceptual designComputer scienceDocumentationDesign educationSet (abstract data type)Human–computer interactionCADEngineering drawingComputer Aided DesignSoftware engineeringEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conceptual design dominates the early stages of most creative design processes. During these stages, the designer makes important decisions about the parameters of a model that are aimed at satisfying a set of design criteria. To do this, the designer produces many sketches of various possible solutions. Meanwhile, computer-aided design (CAD) systems are becoming the dominant visual medium used in design practice. However, these tools evolved as documentation production tools and do not support conceptual thinking. This paper presents a list of guidelines for computer support for conceptual design activities on 3D scenes and presents SESAME (Sketch, Extrude, Sculpt, and Manipulate Easily), a system based on these guidelines. Finally, we present a user study comparing SESAME with a conventional CAD package to demonstrate the effectiveness of SESAME.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.810

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207