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
We present our prototype of PlanWell, a spatial augmented reality interface that facilitates collaborative field operations. PlanWell allows a central overseer (in a command and control center) and a remote explorer (an outdoor user in the field) to explore and collaborate within a geographical area. PlanWell provides the overseer with a tangible user interface (TUI) based on a 3D printout of surface geography which acts as a physical representation of the region to be explored. Augmented reality is used to dynamically overlay properties of the region as well as the presence of the remote explorer and their actions on to the 3D representation of the terrain. The overseer is able to perform the actions directly on the TUI and then the overseer's actions are presented as dynamic AR visualizations superimposed on the explorer's view in the field. Although our interface could applied to many domains, the PlanWell prototype was developed to facilitate petroleum engineering tasks such as well planning and coordination of drilling operations. Our paper describes the details of the design and implementation of the current PlanWell prototype in the context of petroleum well planning and drilling, and discusses some of the preliminary reflections of two focus group sessions with domain experts.
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 | 0.001 |
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 it