MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979311362 · doi:10.3758/s13428-012-0302-1

ELIA: A software application for integrating spoken language and eye movements

2013· article· en· W1979311362 on OpenAlexaff
Jared M. J. Berman, Melanie Khu, Ian Graham, Susan A. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavior Research Methods · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSoftwareEye trackingEye movementProcess (computing)GazeRaw dataArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingHuman–computer interactionProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have developed a new software application, Eye-gaze Language Integration Analysis (ELIA), which allows for the rapid integration of gaze data with spoken language input (either live or prerecorded). Specifically, ELIA integrates E-Prime output and/or .csv files that include eye-gaze and real-time language information. The process of combining eye movements with real-time speech often involves multiple error-prone steps (e.g., cleaning, transposing, graphing) before a simple time course analysis plot can be viewed or before data can be imported into a statistical package. Some of the advantages of this freely available software include (1) reducing the amount of time spent preparing raw eye-tracking data for analysis; (2) allowing for the quick analysis of pilot data in order to identify issues with experimental design; (3) facilitating the separation of trial types, which allows for the examination of supplementary effects (e.g., order or gender effects); and (4) producing standard output files (i.e., .csv files) that can be read by numerous spreadsheet packages and transferred to any statistical software.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.011

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.565
Teacher spread0.373 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueBehavior Research MethodsSame topicNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismFrench-language works237,207