Interruption Audio & Transcript: Derived from Group Affect and Performance Dataset
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
Despite the widespread development and use of chatbots, there is a lack of audio-based interruption datasets. This study provides a dataset of 200 manually annotated interruptions from a broader set of 355 data points of overlapping utterances. The dataset is derived from the Group Affect and Performance dataset managed by the University of the Fraser Valley, Canada. It includes both audio files and transcripts, allowing for multi-modal analysis. Given the extensive literature and the varied definitions of interruptions, it was necessary to establish precise definitions. The study aims to provide a comprehensive dataset for researchers to build and improve interruption prediction models. The findings demonstrate that classification models can generalize well to identify interruptions based on this dataset’s audio. This opens up research avenues with respect to interruption-related topics, ranging from multi-modal interruption classification using text and audio modalities to the analysis of group dynamics.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it