MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516385370

Causviz: visual representations of complex causal semantics based on theories of perception

2011· article· en· W2516385370 on OpenAlexaff
Pourang Irani, Nivedita R. Kadaba

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCausality (physics)Semantics (computer science)Computer scienceCausal structureCausal modelAnimationPerceptionGraphTheoretical computer scienceNatural language processingArtificial intelligenceMathematicsProgramming languagePsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Michotte's theory of ampliation suggests that causal relationships are perceived by objects animated under appropriate spatiotemporal conditions. In this thesis I extend the theory of ampliation and propose that the immediate perception of complex causal relations is also dependent upon a set of structural and temporal rules. The thesis aims at achieving two main goals. The first goal is to define a taxonomy of semantics that describe different causal events in the environment. Ten semantics are defined in this thesis and divided into two main groups; simple causal semantics and complex causal semantics. Simple causal semantics describe basic semantics, which form the building blocks for more complex information and include causal amplification, causal dampening, causal strength, and causal multiplicity. Complex causal semantics are built by enhancing or combining one or more simple semantics and include additive causality, contradictive causality, fully-mediated causality, partially-mediated causality, threshold causality, and bidirectional causality. The second goal of this thesis is to design simple visual representations to describe the causal information. Three representation types were designed during the course of this research; static-graph, static-sequence, and animation. Nine experiments were also conducted to test the effectiveness of these representations. The first five experiments compared the static-graph and the animated representations through Memory Recall and Intuitiveness Evaluations tests. Results of these experiments suggest that animations were ∼8% more accurate and performed ∼9% faster than the static-graph representations. The last four experiments compared an enhanced static representation, called static-sequence, to the animations to test if sequential animation of causal relations had any influence on the superior performance of the animations in the previous experiments. Results of these experiments suggest that there was no significant difference in the performance of the static-sequence representations when compared to the static-graph representations. The results also suggest that the animations performed more accurately than their static counterparts mainly due to their intuitiveness. Overall our results show that animated diagrams that are designed based on perceptual rules such as those proposed by Michotte have the potential to facilitate comprehension of complex causal relations.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Visualization and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207