MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965116697 · doi:10.29173/cais905

Using Sonification to Explore Texting Response Time in Time Stamped Interactional Data

2016· article· fr· W2965116697 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Annual Conference of CAIS / Actes du congrès annuel de l ACSI · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicCognitive and psychological constructs research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSonificationClosenessHumanitiesGeneralizability theoryArtComputer sciencePsychologyHuman–computer interactionMathematicsDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine the utility of sonification for exploringtemporal patterns in time stamped logs of textmessages. Using sonification, we identify patterns in asubset of the logs, and examine how these patternsvary by relational closeness. We then verify thesepatterns’ generalizability in the full dataset usingstatistical analysis.Nous examinons l’utilité de la sonification pourexplorer les tendances temporelles dans les journauxhorodatés de messages texte. Grâce à la sonification,nous identifions les motifs dans un sous-ensembledes journaux, et nous examinons comment ces motifsvarient selon la proximité relationnelle. Nous vérifionsalors si la généralisation de ces motifs est possible etextensible à l’ensemble des données en utilisant uneanalyse statistique.

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)0.054
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.658
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.054
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.007
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.222
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.190 · 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