MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4241808013 · doi:10.1109/iv.2004.1320245

Representing hierarchies using multiple synthetic voices

2004· article· en· W4241808013 on OpenAlex
P. Shajahan, P. Irani

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings. Eighth International Conference on Information Visualisation, 2004. IV 2004. · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHierarchyComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Node (physics)Synthetic dataRepresentation (politics)Task (project management)Range (aeronautics)Artificial intelligenceSpeech recognitionNatural language processingEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work reports on ongoing work related to the representation of hierarchical structures using multiple synthetic voices. We manipulated three synthetic voice parameters, average pitch, pitch range and speech rate, to represent nodes in a hierarchy. We created hierarchies containing 10 nodes and three levels deep. A within-subjects design (N=12) was conducted to compare the effect of multiple synthetic voices to single synthetic voices for locating the positions of items in a hierarchy. Subjects were trained with the set of rules we used for constructing the multiple synthetic voices. In a node-finding task, participants identified the position of a previously listened-to node. Our results show that subjects recalled the nodes' positions in the hierarchy significantly better when the hierarchies were equipped with multiple synthetic voices than without.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.007
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.253 · 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