MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167647679 · doi:10.1145/1822348.1822364

Catalyst

2010· article· en· W2167647679 on OpenAlexaff
Jeremy Long, Anthony Estey, David Bartle, Sven C. Olsen, Amy A. Gooch

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEducational Games and Gamification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGame engineSituatedComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionShaderEducational gameSituated cognitionMultimediaContrast (vision)Artificial intelligenceRendering (computer graphics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we document a simulation of the cat visual system intended to convey four of the major differences between the human and cat visual systems. Learning about an animal's visual system is an important step in understanding how that type of animal perceives the world around them, and how they behave within it. The cat visual system, for example, has been studied extensively by neuroscientists [20, 14, 1, 6], but the results of their work are difficult to convey using traditional text displays that are common in zoos, museums, and classrooms. We achieve some of our effects using fragment shaders applied as post-processes, enabling real-time simulation in either a game engine or live video feed. We also present Catalyst, an educational game that uses our simulation to teach players about the differences between human and cat vision. The tasks in Catalyst are based on the principle of situated cognition, and require the player to switch repeatedly between the two visual systems, thus emphasizing the contrast between them. The results of a user study suggest that Catalyst is successful in stimulating the interest of the players with regard to the material being presented, making it a suitable edutainment application for classrooms, zoos, or other educational settings.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1770.087

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.321 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEducational Games and GamificationFrench-language works237,207