MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4236803254 · doi:10.1145/3173574.3173797

DataInk

2018· article· en· W4236803254 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicData Visualization and Analytics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionVisualizationData visualizationGraphicsBridge (graph theory)Graphical user interfaceInterface (matter)User interfacePoint (geometry)Computer graphics (images)Programming languageArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Creating whimsical, personal data visualizations remains a challenge due to a lack of tools that enable for creative visual expression while providing support to bind graphical content to data. Many data analysis and visualization creation tools target the quick generation of visual representations, but lack the functionality necessary for graphics design. Toolkits and charting libraries offer more expressive power, but require expert programming skills to achieve custom designs. In contrast, sketching affords fluid experimentation with visual shapes and layouts in a free-form manner, but requires one to manually draw every single data point. We aim to bridge the gap between these extremes. We propose DataInk, a system supports the creation of expressive data visualizations with rigorous direct manipulation via direct pen and touch input. Leveraging our commonly held skills, coupled with a novel graphical user interface, DataInk enables direct, fluid, and flexible authoring of creative data visualizations.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.295 · 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

Quick stats

Citations78
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicData Visualization and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207