Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 3D cubic puzzle is implemented in a head-coupled cubic display, pCubee, that allows users to view a 3D scene from different sides. The display is compact and light enough to be held in one hand by an average adult user. By coupling the display with a 3D stylus, pCubee supports the bimanual Kinetic Chain (KC) model for the cubic puzzle task. Users can hold pCubee in their non dominant hand and the stylus in the dominant hand to manipulate the puzzle pieces. Doing the puzzle in pCubee allows us to explore the bimanual stylus interaction scheme the display affords. Figure 1 shows the setup of our system. Our solution involves puzzle pieces with simulated physics in side pCubee, which we refer to as the "working space". Each of the puzzle pieces can be picked up and manipulated by a rendered virtual stylus while also reacting to the movement of the pCubee display. The "solution space" in which the users place the puzzle pieces is located at the center above the pCubee floor within the "working space" and is represented by a wireframe boundary. We conducted two user studies to evaluate performance with two different puzzles. Below we describe the interaction design of our cubic puzzle solution, the hardware and software involved and also the results and findings from the two experiments.
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 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 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".