Comparing CAVE, Wall, and Desktop Displays for Navigation and Wayfinding in Complex 3D Models
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Computer-aided design (CAD) and 3D visualization techniques are at the heart of many engineering processes such as aircraft, ship, and automobile design. These visualization tasks require users to navigate or wayfind through complex 3D geometric models consisting of millions of parts. Despite numerous studies, it remains unclear whether large-screen displays improve user performance for such activities. We present a user study comparing standard desktop, immersive room (i.e., CAVE), and wall displays with 3D stereo / head-tracking, and mono / no head-tracking. We observed individual differences between users and found that the presence of contextual structure greatly impacted performance, suggesting that providing structure and developing interaction techniques accommodating a wide range of users yields better performance than focusing on display characteristics alone. 1.
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 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 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it