MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135829606 · doi:10.1145/3406522.3446037

Visually Linked Keywords to Support Exploratory Browsing

2021· article· en· W3135829606 on OpenAlexafffund
Soumya Shukla, Orland Hoeber

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInformation Retrieval and Search Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsExploratory searchComputer scienceDigital libraryExploratory researchTask (project management)WorkspaceInterface (matter)World Wide WebAcademic libraryHuman–computer interactionInformation retrievalBaseline (sea)MultimediaArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Academic digital library searchers often employ exploratory search strategies when faced with the complex search task of finding academic literature on a topic that is new to them. Unfortunately, the interfaces employed by academic digital libraries provide little support for exploratory browsing, which is a critical first step in exploratory search. To address this shortcoming, we have designed and implemented a novel academic digital library interface (KLink Search) with two new features: visually linked keywords and an interactive workspace. Here, we present preliminary analysis of data collected in a controlled laboratory study (n=32) comparing KLink Search to a baseline interface. Participants reported higher degrees of usefulness, ease-of-use, satisfaction, and knowledge gain after using KLink Search. Participants spent more time on the search tasks, and were able to collect sets of documents that were highly relevant to the tasks. Results from this research illustrate the value of adding lightweight visual and interactive features to academic digital library search interfaces to support exploratory browsing.

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)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInformation Retrieval and Search BehaviorFrench-language works237,207