MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001606898 · doi:10.1080/10447310609526173

Left‐handed scrolling for pen‐based devices

2006· article· en· W2001606898 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 · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHemispheric Asymmetry in Neuroscience
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScrollingLeft handedHuman–computer interactionComputer scienceLeft and rightInterface (matter)Mobile deviceUser interfaceWorld Wide WebComputer graphics (images)EngineeringPhysicsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effectiveness of interaction with mobile devices can be impacted by handedness; however, support for handedness in the interface is rarely provided. The goal of this article is to demonstrate that handedness is a significant interface consideration that should not be overlooked. Four studies were conducted to explore left‐handed user interaction with right‐ or left‐aligned scrollbars on personal digital assistants. Analysis of the data shows that left‐handed users are able to select targets significantly faster using a left‐aligned scrollbar when compared to a right‐aligned scrollbar. User feedback also indicated that a left‐aligned scrollbar was preferred by left‐handed users and provided more natural interaction.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.308 · 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