MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2798687293 · doi:10.1145/3170427.3188540

Do Stereo Display Deficiencies Affect 3D Pointing?

2018· article· en· W2798687293 on OpenAlexaff
Mayra Donaji Barrera Machuca, Wolfgang Stuerzlinger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Optical Imaging Technologies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)Stereo displayDepth perceptionComputer scienceComputer visionPerceptionArtificial intelligenceStereopsisVirtual realityComputer graphics (images)CommunicationPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous work has documented that limitations of current stereo display systems affect depth perception. We performed an experiment to understand if such stereo display deficiencies affect 3D pointing for targets in front of a screen and close to the user, i.e., in peri-personal space. Our experiment compares isolated movements with and without a change in visual depth for virtual targets. Results indicate that selecting targets along the depth axis is slower and has less throughput than laterally positioned targets.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.031
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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations22
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Optical Imaging TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207