MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2892333563 · doi:10.1108/jarhe-03-2018-0047

Digital library keyword analysis for visualization education research

2018· article· en· W2892333563 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Research in Higher Education · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Text Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisualizationComputer scienceDigital libraryInformation retrievalRelevance (law)Information visualizationThesaurusWorld Wide WebSelection (genetic algorithm)Data scienceData miningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to assess the efficacy of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Xplore digital library search engine to return relevant materials on information visualization pedagogy literature and to recommend search strategies to assist the digital library academic readership improve the efficacy of their search tasks. Furthermore, the results are of interest to general readers using similar digital repositories. Design/methodology/approach An initial scoping review using EBSCO Discovery services returned the number and accessibility of sources and publications-based various Boolean searches. A revised search strategy focused the search to IEEE publications as the primary source of visualization research. A corpus of keywords were extracted from the 44 relevant articles and analyzed for relevance, keyword trends and contexts of use. Findings Keyword analysis results show visualization education research is confounded by several information retrieval issues: relevancy, incomplete taxonomy, non-standard lexicon, diverse disciplines and under-representation. Recommendations include: search strategies, alternative digital collections, a potential opportunity for research in information visualization pedagogy to address this gap in an emerging field and the need for more effective interactive tools to assist with keyword selection. Research limitations/implications The study focused on the IEEE publications as the primary source of visualization research. Practical implications A repository of visualization education research that is easily findable and relevant benefits both faculty using information visualization in their teaching and academics whose work must be disseminated to the broadest audience. Strategic keyword selection, interactive keyword tools or more robust thesaurus will enable IEEE Xplore digital library users to optimize their interaction with the system. Furthermore, results suggest a need for more research in information visualization pedagogy. Originality/value This is the only study to uniquely assess the efficacy of the IEEE Xplore digital library database system to retrieve relevant visualization education literature based on keyword search.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.115
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.365 · 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