Towards Accessible, Open, and Ethical Design-Led Digital Humanities Visualization Projects on the Web
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper is an exploration of the design and material considerations for creating design-led digital humanities information visualizations using open and accessible web-based tools. It considers how we might approach or even re-approach the high-level material infrastructures of the web (network/code/browser) to facilitate these goals of openness and accessibility—what could perhaps be called a series of meta-considerations when developing visualization projects for the web. It emphasizes code as a material of design—a material that is argued should not always be the exclusive domain of software developers and engineers but can instead be an open and accessible material for, in this case, building dynamic immersive information visualizations. The aim of thinking of code as material in this way is to allow for the possibility of web-based projects being easily accessed and extended by others. It uses the Glossopticon VR visualization as an example throughout.Cet article est une exploration des considérations de conception et de matériel pour créer des visualisations d'information sur les humanités numériques dirigées par la conception en utilisant des outils Web ouverts et accessibles. Il examine comment nous pourrions aborder ou même réapprocher les infrastructures matérielles de haut niveau du web (réseau/code/navigateur) pour faciliter ces objectifs d'ouverture et d'accessibilité - ce que l'on pourrait peut-être appeler une série de méta-considérations lors de l'élaboration de projets de visualisation pour le web. Il met l'accent sur le code en tant que matériau de conception - un matériau qui, selon nous, ne devrait pas toujours être le domaine exclusif des développeurs de logiciels et des ingénieurs, mais qui peut au contraire être un matériau ouvert et accessible pour, dans ce cas, construire des visualisations d'informations dynamiques et immersives. L'objectif de considérer le code comme un matériau de cette manière est de permettre aux projets basés sur le web d'être facilement accessibles et étendus par d'autres. La visualisation Glossopticon VR est utilisée comme exemple tout au long de l'ouvrage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.047 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".