The design and evaluation of multitouch marking menus
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
Despite the considerable quantity of research directed towards multitouch technologies, a set of standardized UI components have not been developed. Menu systems provide a particular challenge, as traditional GUI menus require a level of pointing precision inappropriate for direct finger input. Marking menus are a promising alternative, but have yet to be investigated or adapted for use within multitouch systems. In this paper, we first investigate the human capabilities for performing directional chording gestures, to assess the feasibility of multitouch marking menus. Based on the positive results collected from this study, and in particular, high angular accuracy, we discuss our new multitouch marking menu design, which can increase the number of items in a menu, and eliminate a level of depth. A second experiment showed that multitouch marking menus perform significantly faster than traditional hierarchal marking menus, reducing acquisition times in both novice and expert usage modalities.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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