MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117715098

TractorBeam: seamless integration of local and remote pointing for tabletop displays

2005· article· en· W2117715098 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

VenueGraphics Interface · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStylusComputer scienceProcess (computing)Table (database)Human–computer interactionInput deviceMulti-touchPoint (geometry)Computer graphics (images)Computer visionComputer hardware
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel interaction technique for tabletop computer displays. When using a direct input device such as a stylus, reaching objects on the far side of a table is difficult. While remote pointing has been investigated for large wall displays, there has been no similar research into reaching distant objects on tabletop displays. Augmenting a stylus to allow remote pointing may facilitate this process. We conducted two user studies to evaluate remote pointing on tabletop displays. Results from our work demonstrate that remote pointing is faster than stylus touch input for large targets, slower for small distant targets, and comparable in all other cases. In addition, when given a choice, people utilized the pointing interaction technique more often than stylus touch. Based on these results we developed the TractorBeam, a hybrid point-touch input technique that allows users to seamlessly reach distant objects on tabletop displays.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.272 · 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