Isn't That Spatial?: Distance and Communication in a 2-D Virtual Environment
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
This article examines the spatial relationships between avatars (i.e., graphical identities or icons) over time in a 2-dimensional online chat environment. The Spatial Distance Analysis Program (SDAP) was developed to measure the distance between avatars in a specially designed Palace environment. Correlations between distance and interpersonal communication constructs of (1) conversational appropriateness, (2) social attraction, and (3) uncertainty reduction indicate that distance effects are significant in an online environment. Specifically, it was found that general conversational appropriateness mediated between uncertainty reduction and specific conversational appropriateness for individuals who moved closer together and farther apart over time, respectively. Furthermore, the relationship between social attraction and distance indicated a significant positive parabolic function; that social attraction (i.e., liking) decreased at middle distances and increased at low and high distances. This finding suggests that there are three interpersonal distance zones in online communication.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it