MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1976148667 · doi:10.1145/2642918.2647352

Pinch-to-zoom-plus

2014· article· en· W1976148667 on OpenAlex
Jeff Avery, Mark Choi, Daniel Vogel, Edward Lank

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNetworks of Centres of Excellence of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsZoomPinchComputer sciencePanning (audio)Computer graphics (images)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPhysicsOpticsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite its popularity, the classic pinch-to-zoom gesture used in modern multi-touch interfaces has drawbacks: specifically, the need to support an extended range of scales and the need to keep content within the view window on the display can result in the need to clutch and pan. In two formative studies of unimanual and bimanual pinch-to-zoom, we found patterns: zooming actions follows a predictable ballistic velocity curve, and users tend to pan the point-of-interest towards the center of the screen. We apply these results to design an enhanced zooming technique called Pinch-to-Zoom-Plus (PZP) that reduces clutching and panning operations compared to standard pinch-to-zoom behaviour.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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)0.0000.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations26
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207