AQuA: Automated Question-Answering in Software Tutorial Videos with Visual Anchors
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tutorial videos are a popular help source for learning feature-rich software. However, getting quick answers to questions about tutorial videos is difficult. We present an automated approach for responding to tutorial questions. By analyzing 633 questions found in 5,944 video comments, we identified different question types and observed that users frequently described parts of the video in questions. We then asked participants (N=24) to watch tutorial videos and ask questions while annotating the video with relevant visual anchors. Most visual anchors referred to UI elements and the application workspace. Based on these insights, we built AQuA, a pipeline that generates useful answers to questions with visual anchors. We demonstrate this for Fusion 360, showing that we can recognize UI elements in visual anchors and generate answers using GPT-4 augmented with that visual information and software documentation. An evaluation study (N=16) demonstrates that our approach provides better answers than baseline methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it