MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158508294 · doi:10.1145/365024.365339

The notification collage

2001· article· en· W2158508294 on OpenAlexaff
Saul Greenberg, Michael Rounding

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUsability and User Interface Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThumbnailWorld Wide WebComputer scienceMultimediaCollaborative softwareInternet privacyImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Notification Collage (NC) is a groupware system where distributed and co-located colleagues comprising a small community post media elements onto a real-time collaborative surface that all members can see. Akin to collages of information found on public bulletin boards, NC randomly places incoming elements onto this surface. People can post assorted media: live video from desktop cameras; editable sticky notes; activity indicator; slide shows displaying a series of digital photos, snapshots of a person's digitial desktop, and Web page thumbnails. User experiences show that NC becomes a rich resource for awareness and collaboration. Community members indicate their presence to others by posting live video. They regularly act on this information by engaging in text and video conversations. Because all people can overhear conversations, these become active opportunities to join in. People also post items they believe will be interesting to others, such as desktop snapshots and vacation photos. Finally, people use NC somewhat differently when it is displayed on a large public screen than when it appears on a personal computer.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.374

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1120.044

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations300
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUsability and User Interface DesignFrench-language works237,207