MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410989829 · doi:10.31219/osf.io/u5hg9_v2

Seeing the Forest Through the Traits: A Four-Dimensional Framework for Modeling and Measuring Latent User Traits

2025· preprint· en· W4410989829 on OpenAlexaff
Fernando Yanez, Rahul G. Krishnan, Carolina Nobre

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRecommender Systems and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconometricsComputer scienceData sciencePsychologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding latent user traits is critical for designing adaptive systems that personalize effectively and responsibly. However, most existing methods rely on lengthy psychometric instruments or focus narrowly on observable behaviors, limiting their scalability and psychological depth. In this paper, we introduce a novel framework for modeling user traits using four interpretable, higher-order dimensions—Perceptual, Relational, Exploratory, and Self-Agency. We derived these dimensions from an empirical analysis of 16 latent traits across personality, cognitive ability, and perceptual skill. We demonstrate how this dimensional structure, refined via dimensionality reduction and clustering, enables interpretable user modeling without sacrificing coverage. To support efficient user assessment, we develop adaptive diagnostic questionnaires that follow path-based decision trees, reducing the number of items while maintaining strong internal consistency and classification performance. A path-level inter-survey analysis on the Self-Agency dimension shows high convergence with the original Rotter Locus of Control scale (r = 0.849, p < .001). Finally, in an initial application study, we show how this framework improves the prediction of task effort in data visualization contexts, outperforming a user-agnostic model in both cross-user and cross-visualization generalization settings. Together, our contributions offer a modular, scalable approach to capturing latent user traits for adaptive interaction design.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRecommender Systems and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207