MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4248553086 · doi:10.1145/1090785

Proceedings of the 7th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility

2005· paratext· en· W4248553086 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Accessibility for Disabilities
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresentation (obstetrics)Event (particle physics)Computer scienceLibrary scienceSpecial Interest Group

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ASSETS 2005 is the seventh in the ACM's series of conferences sponsored by SIGACCESS (formerly SIGCAPH). As in the past, ASSETS 2005 focuses its attention on topics related to design, development, and application of computer-based methodologies to achieve the objectives of universal access, with special attention to the needs of people of al ages and with different capabilities. The ASSETS series of conferences is aimed at providing a technical forum for presenting and disseminating innovative research results that cover either (1) applications of computing and information technologies to provide assistive systems to persons with special needs, or (2) investigation of computing technologies and their use by persons with disabilities. This year, the conference opened with a plenary address by Dr. Clayton Lewis, Professor of Computer Science at the University of Colorado at Boulder. His presentation was titled "Bridges for the Mind: Opportunities for Research on Cognitive Disabilities. ASSETS 2005 is the first event of this conference series to be presented on an annual basis - the previous ASSETS conferences have been held bi-annually. The change to an annual event is in response to the growth of the field and the increasing interest in a more frequent technical venue and discussion forum. As in previous years, the conference is organized in such a way to promote an open forum where researchers, practitioners, educators, and students can present their ideas as formal papers, posters, demonstrations, as well as engage in dialogue, sharing experiences, objectives, accomplishments and different perspectives. In this tradition, ASSETS 2005 is developed as a single-track conference, where formal presentations, interactive sessions, panels, and social events alternate throughout the conference program. The technical program is composed of 23 regular papers, selected by the international program committee out of a total of 60 submissions. The accepted submissions represent the work of 58 authors from Canada, Chile, India, Japan, Sweden, UK, and the USA. The papers are organized in six thematic sessions. The program also includes two sessions dedicated to the presentation of cutting-edge results and work-in-progress, in the form of demos and posters. Posters and demos were submitted in response to a separate call for papers, which generated 30 submissions, of which 21 were selected for presentation. A 2-page abstract for each poster and demo appears in these proceedings. Both technical papers and poster/demo papers were subjected to a competitive peer-review process, ensuring ensured that the papers included in these proceedings represent the state-of-the-art in the field. The program is completed by a panel and the doctoral consortium. The panel brings together researchers, government, and industry representatives to discuss the duality between universal access and assistive technologies. The doctoral consortium, chaired by Julie Jacko, offers an opportunity to doctoral students to present their ideas to both peers and a selected pool of experts. In addition, the main conference includes a session dedicated to the doctoral consortium, providing an opportunity for participants to share their research with the entire ASSETS audience. One doctoral student, selected by the doctoral consortium committee, will present the closing plenary for ASSETS 2005.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.644
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations22
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDigital Accessibility for DisabilitiesFrench-language works237,207