MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167792477 · doi:10.1109/vr.2001.913793

Tolerance of temporal delay in virtual environments

2002· article· en· W2167792477 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOscillopsiaIllusionPerceptionLatency (audio)Simulator sicknessVirtual machineComputer scienceVirtual realityOptical head-mounted displayPhase lagLagComputer visionEye movementArtificial intelligencePsychologyCognitive psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To enhance presence, facilitate sensory motor performance, and avoid disorientation or nausea, virtual-reality applications require the perception of a stable environment. End-end tracking latency (display lag) degrades this illusion of stability and has been identified as a major fault of existing virtual-environment systems. Oscillopsia refers to the perception that the visual world appears to swim about or oscillate in space and is a manifestation of this loss of perceptual stability of the environment. The effects of end-end latency and head velocity on perceptual stability in a virtual environment were investigated psychophysically. Subjects became significantly more likely to report oscillopsia during head movements when end-end latency or head velocity were increased. It is concluded that perceptual instability of the world arises with increased head motion and increased display lag. Oscillopsia is expected to be more apparent in tasks requiring real locomotion or rapid head movement.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.185

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Quick stats

Citations163
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207