MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081439978 · doi:10.1177/154193120304701309

A Sensitivity Study of Factors Influencing Real-Virtual Object Alignment Performance in Stereoscopic Augmented Reality Environments

2003· article· en· W2081439978 on OpenAlexaff
Ming Hou, Paul Milgram

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptical measurement and interference techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionAugmented realityArtificial intelligenceStereoscopyVirtual imageBinocular disparityObject (grammar)Computer scienceSensitivity (control systems)Depth perceptionVirtual realityPosition (finance)StereopsisComputer graphics (images)PsychologyEngineeringPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A sensitivity study involving a real-virtual object alignment task was performed in a stereoscopic augmented reality environment, in which the known conflict between binocular fusion and object interposition cues was expected to play a major role. The object was to evaluate subjects' sensitivity to visual texture of a real hemisphere surface and to target position at designated probe points on that surface. Consistent with earlier experiments, the results indicate that: a) both surface texture and target position had significant effects both on real-virtual object alignment and on the estimate of surface normal direction; b) fusion breakdown caused by the conflict between occlusion and binocular disparity could have been used as an extra depth cue to detect virtual and real object interactions. In addition, a practical solution to improving remote 3D measurement accuracy is proposed.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicOptical measurement and interference techniquesFrench-language works237,207