MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005273090 · doi:10.1145/1268517.1268533

Design as traversal and consequences

2007· article· en· W2005273090 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Christopher G. Jennings, Arthur E. Kirkpatrick

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDesign Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVariety (cybernetics)Computer scienceContext (archaeology)Space (punctuation)Tree traversalDesign rationaleDesign methodsDesign elements and principlesSystems engineeringHuman–computer interactionManagement scienceSoftware engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a design space explorer for the space of experimental designs. For many design problems, design decisions are determined by the consequences of the design rather than its elemental parts. To support this need, the explorer is constructed to make the designer aware of design-level options, provide a structured context for design, and provide feedback on the consequences of design decisions. We argue that this approach encourages the designer to consider a wider variety of designs, which will lead to more effective designs overall. In a qualitative study, experiment designers using the explorer were found to consider a wider variety of designs and more designs overall than they reported considering in their normal practice.

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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.054
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.014
Scholarly communication0.0100.018
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.002

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedingsSame topicDesign Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207