MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4251859513 · doi:10.1145/1180995

Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Multimodal interfaces

2006· paratext· en· W4251859513 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePresentation (obstetrics)Multimodal interactionUser interfaceHuman–computer interactionMultimedia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multimodal interaction is a domain of research that is based on the intuition that humans bring a broad bandwidth of interactive resources to bear in our interactions with other people and with our environment (and computers). It is a rich ground for interdisciplinary research that spans the detection and tracking of human behavior, the production of visual, physical, and audible signals for human consumption, the system architectures, approaches and theories for integrating these varied inputs and outputs, and the experimental methods and evaluations for such multimodal interfaces. As such, multimodal interfaces invite insights from such fields as human-computer interaction, spoken language understanding, natural language understanding, image processing, computer vision, pattern recognition, experimental psychology, psycholinguistics, social psychology, computer-supported cooperative work.These proceedings include the papers accepted for presentation at the Eighth International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI'06) held in Banff, Canada on the November 2-4, 2006. These proceedings are published by ACM.The papers included in these proceedings were selected from 102 contributions with 81 full papers submitted by researchers worldwide. A full double-blind review process was employed. Each paper was allocated for review to four members of the Program Committee, with one serving as the primary reviewer. There were 104 reviewers, each of whom reviewed at least one paper. The process yielded 18 acceptances for oral presentations, and 22 for poster presentations. These papers represent some of the latest developments in the research of multimodal interfaces.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1520.065

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207