MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102500990 · doi:10.1109/iv.2004.59

EzMail: using information visualization techniques to help manage email

2004· article· en· W2102500990 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

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicPersonal Information Management and User Behavior
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorld Wide WebVisualizationFocus (optics)User interfaceThread (computing)AnnotationData visualizationInformation visualizationHuman–computer interactionData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Originally designed as a messaging application, email is now used for a wide range of functions. Email clients however have not progressed correspondingly to support users with email management. This work describes the design of EzMail, an email visualization tool that runs in conjunction with an email client and creates a multi-view interface to assist with email management. Our primary focus is to group and visualize messages as components of threads to provide contextual information and conversational history. We have developed visualizations for individual messages, message properties, and messages in a thread. Message annotation is incorporated, along with a capability for replying simultaneously to several messages. A small user survey and a user study provided information regarding users' management of their messages and threads, and a comparative evaluation of EzMail with respect to Microsoft Outlook.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.005
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.252 · 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