MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039371996 · doi:10.1145/1125451.1125724

Swordfish

2006· article· en· W2039371996 on OpenAlexafffund
Jim Wallace, Vicki Ha, Ryder Ziola, Kori Inkpen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionMetaphorSwordfishUbiquitous computingMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel interaction metaphor for Multiple Display Environments (MDEs) called lightweight personal bindings. This approach enables users to easily bind edges from one display to another and move seamlessly between displays. The goal of this work is to support collocated collaboration in a dynamic multi-display environment while accommodating users' personal preferences. With lightweight personal bindings, each user can choose their own display connections and create a personalized MDE. This approach also helps manage changes in the environment as devices enter, move, or leave.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.163
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1630.071

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations19
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207