MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2542466440 · doi:10.1109/gem.2014.7048093

Iterative design of an augmented reality game and level-editing tool for use in the classroom

2014· article· en· W2542466440 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
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAugmented realityComputer scienceMultimediaEntertainmentIterative designIterative and incremental developmentGame designProcess (computing)Human–computer interactionCurriculumSoftware deploymentGame art designVideo game developmentStoryboardGame DeveloperSoftware engineeringEngineeringPedagogyPsychologyProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Augmented reality is a promising technology for both entertainment and education. However, educators need systems to help them tailor the delivery of content for their specific curricula. In this paper we present the iterative design of an AR editing tool and game to allow educators and students alike to engage with their content in a novel way. The tool and game were iteratively refined over a period of months with six rounds of player observation and feedback, resulting in a simple but enjoyable means of engaging with game content intended for learning. By analyzing the changes made over each stage of the iterative development process, we can derive more general design and deployment insights for using augmented reality in an educational environment.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207