MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1985831652 · doi:10.1117/12.648472

Display conditions that influence wayfinding in virtual environments

2006· article· en· W1985831652 on OpenAlexaff
Roger A. Browse, Derek Gray

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpatial Cognition and Navigation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Computer scienceTask (project management)Human–computer interactionPerceptionField (mathematics)Virtual machineVirtual realityBlankMotion (physics)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionCognitive psychologyPsychologyEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As virtual environments may be used in training and evaluation for critical real navigation tasks, it is important to investigate the factors influencing navigational performance in virtual environments. We have carried out controlled experiments involving two visual factors known to induce or sustain vection, the illusory perception of self-motion. The first experiment had subjects navigate mazes with either a narrow or wide field of view. We measured the percentage of wrong turns, the total time taken for each attempt, and we examined subjects' drawings of the mazes. We found that a wide field of view can have a substantial effect on navigational abilities, even when the wide field of view does not offer any additional clues to the task, and really only provides a larger view of blank walls on the sides. The second experiment evaluated the effect of perspective accuracy in the scene by comparing the use of displays that were corrected for changing head position against those that were not corrected. The perspective corrections available through headtracking did not appear have any influence on navigational abilities. Another component of our study suggests that during navigation in a virtual environment, memory for directions may not be as effective as it could be with supplemental symbolic representations.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.216
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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicSpatial Cognition and NavigationFrench-language works237,207