MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785215785 · doi:10.1145/3173574.3173647

Group vs Individual

2018· article· en· W2785215785 on OpenAlexafffund
Leila Homaeian, Nippun Goyal, James R. Wallace, Stacey D. Scott

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUsability and User Interface Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSensemakingMultitudeComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionTask (project management)Work (physics)Group (periodic table)Joint (building)Group workTilt (camera)Working groupData sciencePsychologyEngineeringSystems engineeringMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cross-device environments (XDEs) have been developed to support a multitude of collaborative activities. Yet, little is known about how different cross-device interaction techniques impact group collaboration, including how their impact on independent and joint work that often occurs during group work. In this work, we explore the impact of two XDE data browsing techniques: TOUCH and TILT. Through a mixed-methods study of a collaborative sensemaking task, we show that TOUCH and TILT have distinct impacts on how groups accomplish, and shift between, independent and joint work. Finally, we reflect on these findings and how they can more generally inform the design of XDEs.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.003

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations30
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUsability and User Interface DesignFrench-language works237,207