MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963383376 · doi:10.11575/prism/36403

Data Embroidery: Exploring Alternative Mediums for Personal Physicalization

2019· article· en· W2963383376 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Kendra Wannamaker, Wesley Willett, Lora Oehlberg, Sheelagh Carpendale

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInternet privacyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Our work explores the use of embroidery as a medium for personal data representation. Personal physicalization is at the intersection of personal visualization and physicalization. More precisely, personal physicalization uses tangible objects to represent data in a personal context. This unique design space inspired us to explore alternative mediums to integrate data with personal artifacts, as well as facilitate the exploration of a multi-sensory data encoding. We first developed a workflow for authoring embroidered physicalizations. Then, we used this process to create an embroidered blanket based on text message data.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.011
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.230
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207