MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094968784 · doi:10.1167/jov.20.11.810

Experimental design with Unity Game Engine

2020· article· en· W3094968784 on OpenAlexaff
Adam O. Bebko, Nikolaus F. Troje

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGame engineComputer scienceHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in virtual reality (VR) technology have provided a wealth of valuable new approaches to vision researchers. VR offers a critical new depth cue, active motion parallax, that provides the observer with a location in the virtual scene that behaves like true locations do: It changes in predictable ways as the observer moves. The contingency between observer motion and visual stimulation is critical and technically challenging and makes coding VR experiments from scratch impractical. Therefore, researchers typically use software such as Unity game engine to create and edit virtual scenes. However, Unity lacks built-in tools for controlling experiments, and existing third-party add-ins require substantial scripting and coding knowledge to design even the simplest of experiments, especially for multifactorial designs. Here, we describe a new free and open-source tool called the BiomotionLab Toolkit for Unity Experiments (bmlTUX). Unlike existing tools, our toolkit provides a graphical interface for configuring factorial experimental designs and turning them into executable experiments. New experiments work “out-of-the-box” and can be created with fewer than twenty lines of code. The toolkit can automatically handle the combinatorics of both random and counterbalanced factors, mixed designs with within- and between-subject factors, and blocking, repetition, and randomization of trial order. A well-defined API makes it easy for users to interface their custom-developed stimulus generation with the toolkit. Experiments can store multiple configurations that can be swapped with a drag-and-drop interface. During runtime, the experimenter can interactively control the flow of trials and monitor the progression of the experiment. Despite its simplicity, bmlTUX remains highly flexible and customizable, catering to both novice and advanced coders. The toolkit simplifies the process of getting experiments up and running quickly without the hassle of complicated scripting.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.344
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207