MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101977864 · doi:10.4018/jmhci.2013070103

Escape-Keyboard

2013· article· en· W2101977864 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

VenueInternational Journal of Mobile Human Computer Interaction · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSightText entryHuman–computer interactionLearnabilityGestureMobile deviceDisplay sizeComputer visionWorld Wide WebDisplay deviceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile text entry methods traditionally have been designed with the assumption that users can devote full visual and mental attention on the device, though this is not always possible. The authors present their iterative design and evaluation of Escape-Keyboard, a sight-free text entry method for mobile touch-screen devices. Escape-Keyboard allows the user to type letters with one hand by pressing the thumb on different areas of the screen and performing a flick gesture. The authors then examine the performance of Escape-Keyboard in a study that included 16 sessions in which participants typed in sighted and sight-free conditions. Qualitative results from this study highlight the importance of reducing the mental load with using Escape-Keyboard to improve user performance over time. The authors thus also explore features to mitigate this learnability issue. Finally, the authors investigate the upper bound on the sight-free performance with Escape-Keyboard by performing theoretical analysis of the expert peak performance.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.631
Threshold uncertainty score0.762

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 communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.280 · 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