MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133538881 · doi:10.1145/3406522.3446055

Supporting Cross-Session Cross-Device Search in an Academic Digital Library

2021· article· en· W3133538881 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastian Gomes, Orland Hoeber

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSession (web analytics)Computer scienceTask (project management)LaptopDigital libraryMultimediaInterface (matter)World Wide WebKey (lock)Mobile deviceSelection (genetic algorithm)Human–computer interactionInformation retrievalArtificial intelligenceOperating systemEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Academic search tasks that are complex may require that a searcher undertake the task over the course of multiple search sessions, and possibly using multiple devices. One of the key challenges in cross-session search is resuming the previously started search task. If task resumption can be supported well in a mobile environment, we may be able to encourage academic searchers to make use of the small down-times they encounter while away from their computers (e.g., while in line at the market). If it is supported well in a desktop/laptop environment, the work that was done on a mobile device can easily be accessed and used. In this paper, we demonstrate an academic digital library search interface that supports cross-session cross-device search, using visualization approaches to support browsing and selection of past search topics, and faceted navigation features to support investigation and examination of previously saved documents.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.351 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorFrench-language works237,207