ChangeCatcher: Increasing Inter‐author Awareness for Visualization Development
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
Abstract We introduce an approach for explicitly revealing changes between versions of a visualization workbook to support version comparison tasks. Visualization authors may need to understand version changes for a variety of reasons, analogous to document editing. An author who has been away for a while may need to catch up on the changes made by their co‐author, or a person responsible for formatting compliance may need to check formatting changes that occurred since the last time they reviewed the work. We introduce ChangeCatcher, a prototype tool to help people find and understand changes in a visualization workbook, specifically, a Tableau workbook. Our design is based on interviews we conducted with experts to investigate user needs and practices around version comparison. ChangeCatcher provides an overview of changes across six categories, and employs a multi‐level details‐on‐demand approach to progressively reveal details. Our qualitative study showed that ChangeCatcher's methods for explicitly revealing and categorizing version changes were helpful in version comparison tasks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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