MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366980597

Gluey: Developing a Head-Worn Display Interface to Unify the Interaction Experience in Distributed Display Environments

2015· preprint· en· W4366980597 on OpenAlexaff
Marcos Serrano, Barrett Ens, Xing-Dong Yang, Pourang Irani

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Archive Toulouse Archive Ouverte (University of Toulouse) · 2015
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUsability and User Interface Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionHead (geology)Computer graphics (images)User interfaceInterface (matter)Head-up displayMultimediaOperating systemArtificial intelligence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Distributed display environments (DDEs) allow use of various specialized devices but challenge designers to provide a clean flow of data across multiple displays. Upcoming consumer-ready head-worn displays (HWDs) can play a central role in unifying the interaction experience in such ecosystems. In this paper, we report on the design and development of Gluey, a user interface that acts as a 'glue' to facilitate seamless input transitions and data movement across displays. Based on requirements we refine for such an interface, Gluey leverages inherent headworn display attributes such as field-of-view tracking and an always-available canvas to redirect input and migrate content across multiple displays, while minimizing device switching costs. We implemented a functional prototype integrating Gluey's numerous interaction possibilities. From our experience in this integration and from user evaluation results, we identify the open challenges in using HWDs to unify the interaction experience in DDEs.

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)0.003
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Archive Toulouse Archive Ouverte (University of Toulouse)Same topicUsability and User Interface DesignFrench-language works237,207