MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100318138 · doi:10.1177/1541931214581482

An Integrated Modular On-line Experiment Platform Proposal for Simulation-Based Experiments with Domain Experts as Participants

2014· article· en· W2100318138 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Lien, Jonathan Histon

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicTeam Dynamics and Performance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSubject-matter expertUSableDomain (mathematical analysis)Modular designPopulationSubject matterWeb applicationHuman–computer interactionTask (project management)UsabilityData scienceWorld Wide WebSystems engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Researchers face difficulty in accessing subject-matter-experts as participants in lab settings for many common human factor research studies. Delivering such experiments online would allow researchers access to a much broader population of subject-matter-experts; however, currently, there appears to be a lack of demonstrated techniques to design and deliver complex research studies on the web. This is particularly the case for experiments involving communication between multiple participants, simulated dynamic task envi-ronments, and participant screening for domain expertise. This paper describes and demonstrates a novel technique of integrating current online video-sharing technology, web-site templating and embedding third-party technologies to create a re-usable, customizable, on-line experiment delivery platform. This allows researchers to include a broader population of subject-matter-experts in a time and cost efficient manner.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicTeam Dynamics and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207