MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046018217 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2007.14461

Modeling Behaviour to Predict User State: Self-Reports as Ground Truth

2020· preprint· en· W3046018217 on OpenAlexaff
Julian Frommel, Regan L. Mandryk

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround truthState (computer science)Common groundComputer sciencePsychologyArtificial intelligenceSocial psychologyAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Methods that detect user states such as emotions are useful for interactive systems. In this position paper, we argue for model-based approaches that are trained on user behaviour and self-reported user state as ground truths. In an application context, they record behaviour, extract relevant features, and use the models to predict user states. We describe how this approach can be implemented and discuss its benefits in comparison to solely self-reports in an application and to models of behaviour without the selfreport ground truths. Finally, we discuss shortcomings of this approach by considering its drawbacks and limitations.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.141 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicEmotion and Mood RecognitionFrench-language works237,207