MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040644680 · doi:10.1109/rev.2010.5625660

Physualization: Going beyond paper prototyping

2010· article· en· W2040644680 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUsability and User Interface Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceProcess (computing)VisualizationSession (web analytics)Requirements analysisRequirements elicitationHuman–computer interactionRequirements engineeringStakeholderFunctional requirementSoftware engineeringSystems engineeringEngineeringWorld Wide WebSoftwareArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present physualization, the deliberate physical manipulation of visualization entities, as a means of helping stakeholders explore possibilities in the requirement and design spaces. By engaging more of the stakeholder's sensory and cognitive processes, our goal is to provide a means to enhance the requirements process and the resulting artifacts. Physualization relies upon readily available materials and ad hoc techniques to facilitate a lightweight requirements process. This work provides guidance for an interactive session that explores physualization support for specific requirements engineering topics; developing paradigms for supporting these tasks using materials like stickies, transparencies, markers, and sketchpads as building blocks.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.250
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

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUsability and User Interface DesignFrench-language works237,207