MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2403463521 · doi:10.1145/2909132.2909266

Multitouch Radial Menu Integrating Command Selection and Control of Arguments with up to 4 Degrees of Freedom

2016· article· en· W2403463521 on OpenAlexafffund
Shrey Gupta, Michael J. McGuffin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceGestureStylusChord (peer-to-peer)ZoomDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)Human–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceComputer visionLens (geology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We design and evaluate a multitouch radial menu for large screens with two desirable properties. First, it allows a single gesture to select a command and then continuously control arguments for that command with unbroken kinesthetic tension. Second, arguments are controlled with 1 or 2 fingers for up to 4 degrees of freedom (DoF). For example, the user may select one command for 4 DoF direct manipulation (translation + scaling + rotation), or another command for 3 DoF camera operations (pan + zoom), using the same two-finger pinch gesture, but with different initial orientations of the gesture to disambiguate. We present a taxonomy to classify previous menuing techniques sharing the first property, and discuss how very few techniques have both of these properties. Our work also extends previous work by Banovic et al. in the following ways: our menu supports submenus and a fast default command, and we experimentally evaluate the effect of varying the number of rings in the menu, the symmetry of the menu, and the use of one hand vs. two hands vs. a stylus and hand.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207