Interactive visualization for multilingual search
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Editor's Summary Multilingual thesauri provide the context for exploring experimental user interfaces that support interactive visualization. The authors created two search interfaces that draw on the semantic richness of bilingual thesauri and provide for search, browse and results display. The Searchling interface offers search, browsable navigation and the full term‐record data for a selected term, as well as a simple switch between language views. It provides active user assistance by displaying options to broaden or narrow search. User evaluation showed Searchling to be easy to use, appealing broadly but especially to linear thinkers. The T‐Saurus interface is more visual, with term search results represented by the size, number, proximity and opacity of buckets. Terms can be displayed in multiple languages simultaneously, and multiple terms can be chosen to form a query to retrieve documents. Visual thinkers appreciated its dynamic and interactive visualization interface. Studies demonstrate the support both interfaces provide for fully using rich, multilingual thesauri as well as differences for users with different cognitive styles.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".