MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2959416902 · doi:10.1111/cgf.13715

Segmentifier: Interactive Refinement of Clickstream Data

2019· article· en· W2959416902 on OpenAlexafffund
Kimberly Dextras-Romagnino, Tamara Munzner

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersMitacs
KeywordsComputer scienceClickstreamVisual analyticsGlyph (data visualization)Process (computing)Data miningVisualizationPath (computing)Set (abstract data type)Downstream (manufacturing)Human–computer interactionTheoretical computer scienceProgramming languageThe InternetWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Clickstream data has the potential to provide insights into e‐commerce consumer behavior, but previous techniques fall short of handling the scale and complexity of real‐world datasets because they require relatively clean and small input. We present Segmentifier, a novel visual analytics interface that supports an iterative process of refining collections of action sequences into meaningful segments. We present task and data abstractions for clickstream data analysis, leading to a high‐level model built around an iterative view‐refine‐record loop with outcomes of conclude with an answer, export segment for further analysis in downstream tools, or abandon the question for a more fruitful analysis path. Segmentifier supports fast and fluid refinement of segments through tightly coupled visual encoding and interaction with a rich set of views that show evocative derived attributes for segments, sequences, and actions in addition to underlying raw sequences. These views support fast and fluid refinement of segments through filtering and partitioning attribute ranges. Interactive visual queries on custom action sequences are aggregated according to a three‐level hierarchy. Segmentifier features a detailed glyph‐based visual history of the automatically recorded analysis process showing the provenance of each segment as an analysis path of attribute constraints. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach through a usage scenario with real‐world data and a case study documenting the insights gained by a corporate e‐commerce analyst.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.300
Teacher spread0.273 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicData Visualization and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207