MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798934669 · doi:10.1145/3209978.3210140

What Do Viewers Say to Their TVs?

2018· article· en· W2798934669 on OpenAlexaff
Jinfeng Rao, Ferhan Türe, Jimmy Lin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTopic Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)Taxonomy (biology)Information retrievalEntertainmentService (business)World Wide WebProduct (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A recently-introduced product of Comcast, a large cable company in the United States, is a "voice remote" that accepts spoken queries from viewers. We present an analysis of a large query log from this service to answer the question: "What do viewers say to their TVs?" In addition to a descriptive characterization of queries and sessions, we describe two complementary types of analyses to support query understanding. First, we propose a domain-specific intent taxonomy to characterize viewer behavior: as expected, most intents revolve around watching programs---both direct navigation as well as browsing---but there is a non-trivial fraction of non-viewing intents as well. Second, we propose a domain-specific tagging scheme for labeling query tokens, that when combined with intent and program prediction, provides a multi-faceted approach to understand voice queries directed at entertainment systems.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTopic ModelingFrench-language works237,207