MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146256275 · doi:10.1109/das.2008.21

MathBrush: A System for Doing Math on Pen-Based Devices

2008· article· en· W2146256275 on OpenAlexaff
George Labahn, Edward Lank, Scott MacLean, Mirette Marzouk, David Tausky

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSymbol (formal)Computer scienceInterface (matter)Expression (computer science)Mathematical problemUser interfaceTransformation (genetics)Theoretical computer scienceArtificial intelligenceAlgebra over a fieldHuman–computer interactionMathematicsMathematics educationProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many on-line (interactive) mathematics recognition systems allow the creation of typeset equations, normally in LaTeX, but they do not support mathematical problem solving. In this paper, we present MathBrush, a system that allows users to draw math input using a pen-input device on a tablet computer, recognizes the math expression, and then supports mathematical transformation and problem solving using back-end Computer Algebra Systems (CAS). We describe the architecture of the MathBrush system, which includes modules that support symbol recognition, semantic analysis, the transfer of recognized expressions to back-end CAS, and interface techniques for interacting with CAS output. We also identify unique challenges associated with recognition for math problem solving, such as the need for deeper semantic analysis than is required by LATEX, and the need to deal with ambiguities in user input. Our experiences serve to inform researchers seeking to design interactive mathematics recognition systems geared toward mathematical problem solving.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.276

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0820.025

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsFrench-language works237,207