MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025153817 · doi:10.1145/2628257.2628264

Evaluating affective features of 3D motionscapes

2014· article· en· W2025153817 on OpenAlexafffund
Chao Feng, Lyn Bartram, Bernhard E. Riecke

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNetworks of Centres of Excellence of CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)Motion (physics)Computer scienceHuman–computer interactionCraftPresentation (obstetrics)Cognitive psychologyArtificial intelligencePsychologyVisual artsCommunicationArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract motion textures are widely applied in visual design and immersive environments such as games to imbue the environment or presentation with affect. While visual designers and artists carefully manipulate visual elements such as colour, form and motion to evoke affect, understanding what aspects of motion contribute to this still remains a matter of designer craft rather than validated principle. We report an empirical study of how simple features of motion in 3D textures, or motionscapes, contribute to the elicitation of affect. 12 university students were recruited to evaluate a series of 3D motionscapes. Results showed basic motion properties including speed, direction, path curvature and shape had significant influence on affective impressions such as valence, comfort, urgency and intensity, suggesting further directions for applications and explorations in this design space.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicColor perception and designFrench-language works237,207