Porous Interfaces for Small Screen Multitasking using Finger Identification
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The lack of dedicated multitasking interface features in smartphones has resulted in users attempting a sequential form of multitasking via frequent app switching. In addition to the obvious temporal cost, it requires physical and cognitive effort which increases multifold as the back and forth switching becomes more frequent. We propose porous interfaces, a paradigm that combines the concept of translucent windows with finger identification to support efficient multitasking on small screens. Porous interfaces enable partially transparent app windows overlaid on top of each other, each of them being accessible simultaneously using a different finger as input. We design porous interfaces to include a broad range of multitasking interactions with and between windows, while ensuring fidelity with the existing smartphone interactions. We develop an end-to-end smartphone interface that demonstrates porous interfaces. In a qualitative study, participants found porous interfaces intuitive, easy, and useful for frequent multitasking scenarios.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it