MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3132372953 · doi:10.1177/1071181320641514

Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, and Virtual Environments: Demonstrations of Current Technologies and Future Directions

2020· article· en· W3132372953 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Beadle, Randall D. Spain, Benjamin Goldberg, Mahdi Ebnali, Shannon K. T. Bailey, Brendan A. Ciccone, Ragan Wilson, Summer Rubensky, Meredith Carroll, Winston Bennett, Xueyu Hu, Adam J. Reiner, Holland Vasquez, Abigail R. Wooldridge, Lydia Lee, Parth Verma, Heejin Jeong, Logan M. Gisick, J. Gay French, Joseph R. Keebler

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSurgical Simulation and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realitySession (web analytics)PopularityComputer scienceAugmented realityImmersive technologyMultimediaHuman–computer interactionField (mathematics)Work (physics)Mixed realityImmersion (mathematics)Emerging technologiesEngineeringWorld Wide WebPsychologyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual environments and immersive technologies are growing in popularity for human factors purposes. Whether it is training in a low-risk environment or using simulated environments for testing future automated vehicles, virtual environments show promise for the future of our field. The purpose of this session is to have current human factors practitioners and researchers demonstrate their immersive technologies. This is the eighth iteration of the “Me and My VE” interactive session. Presenters in this session will provide a brief introduction of their virtual reality, augmented reality, or virtual environment work before engaging with attendees in an interactive demonstration period. During this period, the presenters will each have a multimedia display of their immersive technology as well as discuss their work and development efforts. The selected demonstrations cover issues of designing immersive interfaces, military and medical training, and using simulation to better understand complex tasks. This includes a mix of government, industry, and academic-based work. Attendees will be virtually immersed in the technologies and research presented allowing for interaction with the work being done in this field.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.281
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 designSimulation or modeling
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 venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicSurgical Simulation and TrainingFrench-language works237,207