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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultra-high resolution wall-sized displays (“ultra-walls”) are effective for presenting large datasets, but their size and resolution make traditional pointing techniques inadequate for precision pointing. We study mid-air pointing techniques that can be combined with other, domain-specific interactions. We first explore the limits of existing single-mode remote pointing techniques and demonstrate theoretically that they do not support high-precision pointing on ultra-walls. We then explore solutions to improve mid-air pointing efficiency: a tunable acceleration function and a framework for dual-precision (DP) techniques, both with precise tuning guidelines. We designed novel pointing techniques following these guidelines, several of which outperform existing techniques in controlled experiments that involve pointing difficulties never tested prior to this work. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of our techniques to help interaction designers choose the best technique according to the task and equipment at hand. Finally, we discuss the cognitive mechanisms that affect pointing performance with these techniques.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it