MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interactive Exploratory Visualization of 2D Vector Fields

2008· article· en· W2072589092 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

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlyph (data visualization)Computer scienceVisualizationComputer graphics (images)AnimationSet (abstract data type)Field (mathematics)Computer animationEuclidean vectorVector fieldArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper we present several techniques to interactively explore representations of 2D vector fields. Through a set of simple hand postures used on large, touch‐sensitive displays, our approach allows individuals to custom‐design glyphs (arrows, lines, etc.) that best reveal patterns of the underlying dataset. Interactive exploration of vector fields is facilitated through freedom of glyph placement, glyph density control, and animation. The custom glyphs can be applied individually to probe specific areas of the data but can also be applied in groups to explore larger regions of a vector field. Re‐positionable sources from which glyphs—animated according to the local vector field—continue to emerge are used to examine the vector field dynamically. The combination of these techniques results in an engaging visualization with which the user can rapidly explore and analyze varying types of 2D vector fields, using a virtually infinite number of custom‐designed glyphs.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.258 · 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