MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2608909763 · doi:10.1145/3067822

Gaze-Contingent Auditory Displays for Improved Spatial Attention in Virtual Reality

2017· article· en· W2608909763 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityNational Research Council Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGazeComputer scienceVirtual realityHuman–computer interactionNatural soundsNatural (archaeology)Set (abstract data type)MultimediaSpeech recognitionComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual reality simulations of group social interactions are important for many applications, including the virtual treatment of social phobias, crowd and group simulation, collaborative virtual environments (VEs), and entertainment. In such scenarios, when compared to the real world, audio cues are often impoverished. As a result, users cannot rely on subtle spatial audio-visual cues that guide attention and enable effective social interactions in real-world situations. We explored whether gaze-contingent audio enhancement techniques driven by inferring audio-visual attention in virtual displays could be used to enable effective communication in cluttered audio VEs. In all of our experiments, we hypothesized that visual attention could be used as a tool to modulate the quality and intensity of sounds from multiple sources to efficiently and naturally select spatial sound sources. For this purpose, we built a gaze-contingent display (GCD) that allowed tracking of a user’s gaze in real-time and modifying the volume of the speakers’ voices contingent on the current region of overt attention. We compared six different techniques for sound modulation with a base condition providing no attentional modulation of sound. The techniques were compared in terms of source recognition and preference in a set of user studies. Overall, we observed that users liked the ability to control the sounds with their eyes. They felt that a rapid change in attenuation with attention but not the elimination of competing sounds (partial rather than absolute selection) was most natural. In conclusion, audio GCDs offer potential for simulating rich, natural social, and other interactions in VEs. They should be considered for improving both performance and fidelity in applications related to social behaviour scenarios or when the user needs to work with multiple audio sources of information.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.641
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.280 · 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