MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Graphics Interface 2007 : Montréal, Canada, May 28-30, 2007 : proceedings

2007· book· en· W21707824 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christopher G. Healey, Edward Lank

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Entomology and Zoology · 2007
Typebook
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRendering (computer graphics)Scientific visualizationComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)Computer graphicsAnimationVisualizationParallel renderingSoftware renderingGraphics3D computer graphicsComputer animationReal-time renderingHuman–computer interactionAugmented realityVirtual realityMultimediaArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Welcome to Graphics Interface 2007. This annual conference, now in its 33rd year, is devoted to computer graphics, interactive systems, and human-computer interaction. Beginning in 1969 as the Canadian Man-Computer Communications Seminar (CMCCS), it is the oldest regularly-scheduled computer graphics and human-computer interaction conference. This year, Graphics Interface was held May 27-29, 2007 in Montreal, Quebec. Topics of interest at GI include (but are not restricted to): * Shading and rendering * Geometric modeling and meshing * Graphics in simulation * Image-based rendering * Image synthesis and realism * Medical and scientific visualization * Computer animation * Real-time rendering * Non-photorealistic rendering * Scientific and information visualization * Interaction techniques * Computer-supported cooperative work * Human interface devices * Virtual reality * Augmented reality * Data and information visualization * Multimedia * Mobile computing * Haptic and tangible interfaces * Perception

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)0.001
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 score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2980.157

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Entomology and ZoologySame topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207