Towards Ontology-Driven User Experience Assessment of Collaborative Modeling Tools
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
Collaborative Modeling (CM) tools increasingly offer advanced editing features, such as live co-editing, embedded chat, and automated reasoning. Yet, the impact of these features on the user experience (UX) of modeling is less understood. In this paper, we explore the relationship between CM and UX by developing a mapping between existing CM and UX ontologies. We propose CMUX Explorer, an ontology-driven assessment tool that enables tool builders to identify CM features with UX impact. The conversational front-end allows for natural-language interactions, which CMUX Explorer translates to SPARQL queries, executes them against the ontology, and returns ranked, interpretable recommendations to guide design decisions. Importantly, our approach supports continuous, semi-automated improvement of the ontology, leading to more precise recommendations over time. Through this work, we pave a path towards computer-aided design of UX-aware collaborative modeling tools.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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