MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4249750559 · doi:10.1145/503436.503438

Cognitive cubes

2002· article· en· W4249750559 on OpenAlexaff
Ehud Sharlin, Yuichi Itoh, Benjamin Watson, Yoshifumi Kitamura, Steve Sutphen, Lili Liu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCognitionCognitive flexibilityConsistency (knowledge bases)Flexibility (engineering)Reliability (semiconductor)Pencil (optics)Spatial abilityCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligencePsychologyMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assessments of spatial, constructional ability are used widely in cognitive research and in clinical diagnosis of disease or injury. Some believe that three-dimensional (3D) forms of these assessments would be particularly sensitive, but difficulties with consistency in administration and scoring have limited their use. We describe Cognitive Cubes, a novel computerized tool for 3D constructional assessment that increases consistency and promises improvements in flexibility, reliability, sensitivity and control. Cognitive Cubes makes use of ActiveCube, a novel tangible user interface for describing 3D shape. In testing, Cognitive Cubes was sensitive to differences in cognitive ability and task, and correlated well to a standard paper-and-pencil 3D spatial assessment

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.007

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207