MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multimedia Sensory Cue Processing in the FIVIS Simulation Environment

2011· book-chapter· en· W2476525162 on OpenAlexaff
Rainer Herpers, David Scherfgen, Michael Kutz, Jens Bongartz, Ulrich Hartmann, Oliver Schulzyk, Sandra Boronas, Timur Saitov, H. Steiner, Dietmar Reinert

Bibliographic record

VenueIGI Global eBooks · 2011
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerceptionSensory systemSensory cueComputer scienceVirtual realityVisualizationHuman–computer interactionVestibular systemDepth perceptionVisual perceptionMultimediaPsychologyCognitive psychologyArtificial intelligenceNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The FIVIS simulator system addresses the classical visual and acoustical cues as well as vestibular and further physiological cues. Sensory feedback from skin, muscles, and joints are integrated within this virtual reality visualization environment. By doing this it allows for simulating otherwise dangerous traffic situations in a controlled laboratory environment. The system has been successfully applied for road safety education applications of school children. In further research studies it is applied to perform multimedia perception experiments. It has been shown, that visual cues dominate by far the perception of visual depth in the majority of applications but the quality of depth perception might depend on the availability of other sensory information. This however, needs to be investigated in more detail in the future.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.278 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIGI Global eBooksSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207