MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1505026495 · doi:10.26503/dl.v2005i1.113

socio-ec(h)o: Ambient Intelligence and Gameplay

2005· article· en· W1505026495 on OpenAlexaff
Ron Wakkary, Marek Hatala, Robb Lovell, Milena Droumeva, Alissa N. Antle, Dale Evernden, Jim Bizzocchi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInnovative Human-Technology Interaction
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmbodied cognitionComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionAmbient intelligenceEmbodied agentENCODEParticipatory designCognitionGame designArtificial intelligencePsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the preliminary research of an ambient intelligent system known as socio- ec(h)o. socio-ec(h)o explores the design and implementation of an ambient intelligent system for sensing and display, user modeling, and interaction models based on game structures. Our interaction model is based on a game structure including levels, body states, goals and game skills. Body states are the body movements and positions that players must discover in order to complete a level and in turn represent a learned game skill. The paper provides an overview of background concepts and related research. We describe the game structure and prototype of our environment. We discuss games research concepts we utilized and our approach to group user models based on Richard Bartle’s game types. We explain the role of embodied cognition within our design and elaborate on what we chose to encode as embodied actions, cognition and communication. We describe how we utilized selective responses that were real-time, gradient, provided rewards and were unique to different group user models. We introduce our approach to designing ambient intelligent systems that is ecologically inspired. We stress the empirical nature of the design work and the role of participatory design in developing our system.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.836
Threshold uncertainty score0.530

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInnovative Human-Technology InteractionFrench-language works237,207