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 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
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.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.656
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 science0.0020.000
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 head0.024
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

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207