MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

COMMUNICATING MULTILEVEL EVACUATION CONTEXT USING SITUATED AUGMENTED REALITY

2018· article· en· W2891998246 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Lochhead, Nick Hedley

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEvacuation and Crowd Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceContext (archaeology)Emergency managementSituatedAugmented realityComponent (thermodynamics)Plan (archaeology)Human–computer interactionMixed realitySpatial contextual awarenessEvent (particle physics)Emergency evacuationData scienceKnowledge managementArtificial intelligenceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Emergency preparedness is a fundamental component of a successful emergency management strategy. This includes a proactive communication strategy that informs all stakeholders of the emergency plan and helps translate that knowledge to real spaces. Communicating multilevel built environments can be difficult, as the architectural complexity creates problems for both visual and mental representations of networks in 3D space. Modern mobile technology offers emerging opportunities for emergency managers to develop and deploy 3D visualizations of multilevel spaces that preserve the topology of those spaces while adding the spatial context that allows the individual to better understand their position within it. In this paper, we present a collection of mixed reality (specifically augmented reality) geovisualizations that overcome the visual limitations associated with the traditional static 2D methods of communicating the evacuation plans of multilevel structures. We demonstrate how this technology can provide spatially contextualized 3D geovisualizations that promote spatial knowledge acquisition and support cognitive mapping. These geovisualizations are designed as a proactive emergency management tool to educate and prepare at risk populations prior to the occurrence of a hazardous event.

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 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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS annals of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicEvacuation and Crowd DynamicsFrench-language works237,207