MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3004902121 · doi:10.1145/3374920.3375004

Encasing Computation

2020· article· en· W3004902121 on OpenAlexaff
Kate Hartman, Chris Luginbuhl, Yiyi Shao, Ricardo Toller Correia

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsOntario College of Art and Design
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicrocontrollerWearable computerComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Wearable technologyBridge (graph theory)ElectronicsEmbedded systemEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces initial attempts to bridge the worlds of digital fabrication and do-it-yourself wearable electronics. It introduces a selection of microcontrollers that are anticipated to work well in a wearable context and provides an overview of five prototypes: Folding Felt Photon, Photon Sleepers, Circuit Playground Aurora Hat, Feather Belt, and Feather Shoes. These prototypes use laser cutting and/or 3D printing to produce microcontroller enclosures that can be worn on the body. Rigid and flexible materials are used alone and in combination to achieve qualities such as conformability, comfort, and device protection. Digital fabrication techniques facilitate rapid and repeatable production of prototypes for testing while allowing precise modification of fit, material thickness and machine settings. The intent is to demonstrate this approach and to share initial designs for digitally fabricated encasements that allow researchers, designers, and artists to better integrate small computational systems into clothing or other wearables.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.013

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207