Using perceptual syntax to enhance semantic content in diagrams
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
Diagrams are essential in documenting large information systems. They capture, communicate, and leverage knowledge indispensable for solving problems and act as cognitive externalizations (intertwining internal and external processes to extract information from the external world to enhance thought). A diagram provides a mapping from the problem domain to the visual representation by supporting cognitive processes that involve perceptual pattern finding and cognitive symbolic operations. However, not all mappings are equal, and for effectiveness we must embed a diagram's representation with characteristics, which lets users easily perceive meaningful patterns. Consequently, a diagram's effectiveness depends to some extent on how well we construct it as an input to our visual system. In our research, we focus on a class of diagrams commonly referred to as graphs or node-link diagrams. Nodes representing entities, objects, or processes, and links or edges representing relationships between the nodes characterize them. Their most common form is outline circles or boxes denoting nodes and lines of different types representing links between the nodes. Entity-relationship diagrams, software structure diagrams, and data-flow models are examples of node-link diagrams used to model the structure of processes, software, or data.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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