MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2398111654 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.1178444

A Quantitative Comparison Of Position Trackers For The Development Of A Touch-Less Musical Interface

2012· article· en· W2398111654 on OpenAlex
Gabriel Vigliensoni, Marcelo M. Wanderley

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

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMusic Technology and Sound Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBitTorrent trackerPosition (finance)Computer scienceTracking (education)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceInterface (matter)Computer graphics (images)Eye tracking

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a comparison of three-dimensional (3D) position tracking systems in terms of some of their performance parameters such as static accuracy and precision, update rate, and shape of the space they sense. The underlying concepts and characteristics of position tracking tech-nologies are reviewed, and four position tracking systems (Vicon, Polhemus, Kinect, and Gametrak), based on dif-ferent technologies, are empirically compared according to their performance parameters and technical specifications. Our results show that, overall, the Vicon was the position tracker with the best performance.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score0.697

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.224 · 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