MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2522395253 · doi:10.1177/0040517516669072

Developing a mapping from affective words to design parameters for affective design of apparel products

2016· article· en· W2522395253 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTextile Research Journal · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClothingAffect (linguistics)Computer scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)Order (exchange)Function (biology)Artificial neural networkHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligencePsychologyBusinessMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of an emotion-based (or affect-based) apparel design system has become an important issue nowadays due to the customer’s increased demand for apparel products not only in the aspect of function but also of aesthetics or affect/emotion. This paper presents a study on developing a mapping from affective words to design parameters. The technique employed to develop this mapping is neural networks (NNs). Both linear NNs and higher-order NNs were applied. An example was taken to illustrate and validate the developed mapping. There are two main contributions from the study. The first is that this mapping is the first in the domain of apparel design, and with it, the computer-aided affect-based design for apparel becomes possible. The second one is the provision of some empirical knowledge for the evaluation of so-called higher-order NNs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.346
GPT teacher head0.456
Teacher spread0.110 · 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