MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000304590 · doi:10.1080/10447318.2012.715535

Investigating a Design Space for Multidevice Environments

2012· article· en· W2000304590 on OpenAlex

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

VenueInternational Journal of Human-Computer Interaction · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteractivityComputer sciencePhoneHuman–computer interactionMultimediaComplement (music)Space (punctuation)PersonalizationWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been significant research interest over recent years in the use of public digital displays and in particular their capability to offer both interactivity and personalized content. Although a number of interaction technologies have been investigated, a promising approach has been the use of the ubiquitous cell phone, which not only offers a means to interact with displays but increasingly offers a small but high-quality screen to complement the larger public display. However, to date there has been little investigation into the impact on users when interfaces are distributed across this type of dual screen setup. This article reports on a series of experiments carried out to determine if there is a significant quantitative or qualitative effect on user performance when interaction is split across large public and smaller private screens.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.833
Threshold uncertainty score0.670

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.285 · 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