MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414892428 · doi:10.1177/14738716251360339

Visualizing information on smartwatch faces: A review and design space

2025· article· en· W4414892428 on OpenAlexaff
Alaul Islam, Tingying He, Anastasia Bezerianos, Tanja Blascheck, Bongshin Lee, Petra Isenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueInformation Visualization · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
FundersAgence Nationale de la RechercheDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsSmartwatchContext (archaeology)VisualizationVariety (cybernetics)Space (punctuation)Data visualizationInteraction design

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a systematic review and design space for visualizations on smartwatches and the context in which these visualizations are displayed—smartwatch faces. A smartwatch face is the primary smartwatch screen wearers see when checking the time. Smartwatch faces are small data dashboards that show a variety of data to wearers in a compact form. Yet, smartwatch faces’ usage context and form factor pose unique design challenges for visualizations. In this paper, we conducted an in-depth review and analysis of visualization designs for popular premium smartwatch faces based on their design styles, amount and types of data, as well as visualization styles and encodings they included. From our analysis, we derive a design space to provide an overview of the important considerations for new data displays for smartwatch faces and other small displays. Our design space can also serve as inspiration for design choices and grounding of empirical work on smartwatch visualization design. We end with a research agenda pointing to opportunities in this nascent research direction. Supplemental material from the study is available here: https://osf.io/p3tbj/ .

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0120.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInformation VisualizationSame topicInnovative Human-Technology InteractionFrench-language works237,207