MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2540172011 · doi:10.1109/tic-sth.2009.5444387

Model-driven coding with VPAT: The Verbal Protocol Analysis Tool

2009· article· en· W2540172011 on OpenAlexaff
Danielle Lottridge, Mark Chignell, Monika Kastner, Quan Zhang, Adrian Alexandar, Sharon E. Straus

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCoding (social sciences)UsabilityHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the coding tool VPAT (Verbal Protocol Analysis Tool), specifically designed to facilitate model driven analysis of users' verbal data. Such model-driven coding presents challenges in terms of efficiency and reliability. Engineers and researchers need effective means of coding with complex, hierarchical, multi-level coding schemes. VPAT allows input of customizable coding schemes, quick and easy insertion of codes into text documents with a user-friendly interface, and extraction of codes for analysis purposes. VPAT was developed for research purposes with user-centered design methods with various stakeholders. The VPAT prototype runs in conjunction with MS Access and MS Excel. Comparative task analysis breakdowns of main coding tasks in VPAT and a leading coding application are presented to demonstrate advantages and tradeoffs. A case study of coding usability data for a healthcare information retrieval system is presented to demonstrate usage and benefits. VPAT is a specific tool suited to model-based coding, and was shown to increase speed and reliability.

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)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.120
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.240

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.120
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0040.005
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.006

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.323
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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207