MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1989222389 · doi:10.1145/2457450.2457451

Human perception of haptic-to-video and haptic-to-audio skew in multimedia applications

2013· article· en· W1989222389 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing Communications and Applications · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaptic technologyComputer scienceAsynchrony (computer programming)PerceptionHaptic perceptionMultimediaVideo gameAsynchronous communicationHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research is to assess the sensitivity of humans to perceive asynchrony among media signals coming from a computer application. Particularly we examine haptic-to-video and haptic-to-audio skew. For this purpose we have designed an experimental setup, where users are exposed to a basic multimedia presentation resembling a ping-pong game. For every collision between a ball and a racket, the user is able to perceive auditory, visual, and haptic cues about the collision event. We artificially introduce negative and positive delay to the auditory and visual cues with respect to the haptic stream. We subjectively evaluate the perception of inter-stream asynchrony perceived by the users using two types of haptic devices. The statistical results of our evaluation show perception rates of around 100 ms regardless of modality and type of device.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.586
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.279 · 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