MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991120857 · doi:10.1145/2788940.2788957

Comparing Direct Off-Screen Pointing, Peephole, and Flick & Pinch Interaction for Map Navigation

2015· article· en· W1991120857 on OpenAlexaff
Khalad Hasan, David Ahlström, Pourang Irani

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViewportWorkspaceComputer scienceGestureTask (project management)Human–computer interactionMobile deviceComputer visionArtificial intelligenceInteraction techniqueComputer graphics (images)RobotWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Navigating large workspaces with mobile devices often require users to access information that spatially lies beyond it's viewport. To browse information on such workspaces, two prominent spatially-aware navigation techniques, peephole, and direct off-screen pointing, have been proposed as alternatives to the standard on-screen flick and pinch gestures. Previous studies have shown that both techniques can outperform on-screen gestures in various user tasks, but no prior study has compared the three techniques in a map-based analytic task. In this paper, we examine these two spatially-aware techniques and compare their efficiency to on-screen gestures in a map navigation and exploration scenario. Our study demonstrates that peephole and direct off-screen pointing allows for 30% faster navigation times between workspace locations and that on-screen flick and pinch is superior for accurate retrieval of workspace content.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.712
Threshold uncertainty score0.440

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207