Compensating for Perspective-based Distortion on Large Interactive Floor Displays: the SpaceHopper Field Experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Very large floor displays can promote engaging public experiences, but incur perspective-related warping, making it challenging to comprehend and interact with distal objects when standing on the display. We introduce a perspective compensated view technique that maintains the relative size and shape of objects as they move away from the viewer, and explore the technique in SpaceHopper, a large-scale, floor-projected version of the game Asteroids. Players bounce on a hopper ball to control their ship in one of two control modes: bounce to repel or bounce to shoot. We evaluated SpaceHopper in a field experiment with 59 participants, finding that perspective compensated view yielded longer playing times (and higher scores) in the bounce to fire modality. Bystanders were highly engaged with players and also seemed to be unaware of the perspective warping, suggesting that visually compensating for the interactor’s perspective does not adversely impact the enjoyment of passive participants and audience members, at least under some circumstances.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".