Conceptualizing User Satisfaction in the Ubiquitous Computing Era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this research-in-progress paper we argue that technology in the ubiquitous computing era offers experiences to users that extend well beyond the functional, practical applications offered in the world of work. In this era a realm of engagement is opening up to the individual that transcends the utilitarian, to encompass hedonic and social existence. Our central argument, therefore, is that user satisfaction is a notion which must extend to encompass rich, holistic human experience involving complex and fleeting interactions, driven by highly personal circumstances. We argue that the expectations, requirements and value perceptions of individuals in this dynamic context may only be anticipated and understood if situational factors (such as location, time, context, history-of-use) and quality of life factors (such as life stage, mobility, health, income, background, education) are taken into account. We identify the fundamental differences in key characteristics of user satisfaction between the traditional and ubiquitous computing environments and provide details about our own research approach, in which we are exploring ubiquitous content provision from the perspective of content providers.
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 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 | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".