MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W50423643

Orientation and Gesture on Horizontal Displays

2002· article· en· W50423643 on OpenAlexaff
Russell Kruger, Sheelagh Carpendale

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestureOrientation (vector space)Horizontal and verticalSpace (punctuation)Computer scienceHuman–computer interactionHorizontal planeContrast (vision)Ideal (ethics)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceGeometryMathematicsPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Orientation has been recognized as a significant issue for software for horizontal displays. When people stand around a horizontal display, they view the contents from different angles. A common approach to this problem has been to orient objects towards the user who has currently selected them. In contrast, our observational study indicates that there may be many positive uses of variant orientation. Adjusting the orientation of objects can be used to establish personal space, create a public space, and is used as a significant part of gestures that direct comments, ask for help, and indicate interest. Many of these orientation adjustments or gestures are partial in that an angle is chosen somewhere between ideal for both people, and temporary in that objects are frequently rotated back. This indicates that it may be important to support partial and temporary rotations in order to provide people with the opportunity to use this type of gesturing when collaborating on a tabletop display. 1

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations10
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207