MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Data-Wink Ratio: Emoji Encoder for Generating Semantically-Resonant Unit Charts

2024· article· en· W4404740936 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Brehmer, Vidya Setlur, Zoe, Michael Correll

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmojiComputer scienceEncoderUnit (ring theory)Computer graphics (images)Speech recognitionMathematicsWorld Wide WebOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communicating data insights in an accessible and engaging manner to a broader audience remains a significant challenge. To address this problem, we introduce the Emoji Encoder, a tool that gen-erates a set of emoji recommendations for the field and category names appearing in a tabular dataset. The selected set of emoji encodings can be used to generate configurable unit charts that com-bine plain text and emojis as word-scale graphics. These charts can serve to contrast values across multiple quantitative fields for each row in the data or to communicate trends over time. Any resulting chart is simply a block of text characters, meaning that it can be directly copied into a text message or posted on a communication platform such as Slack or Teams. This work represents a step toward our larger goal of developing novel, fun, and succinct data storytelling experiences that engage those who do not identify as data analysts. Emoji-based unit charts can offer contextual cues related to the data at the center of a conversation on platforms where emoji-rich communication is typical.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.009

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207