Virtual Reality Customized 360-Degree Experiences for Stress Relief
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The latest studies in virtual reality (VR) have evidenced the potential of this technology to reproduce environments from multiple domains in an immersive way. For instance, in stress relief research, VR has been presented as a portable and inexpensive alternative to chromotherapy rooms, which require an adapted space and are expensive. In this work, we propose a portable and versatile alternative to the traditional chromotherapy color-loop treatment through four different 360-degree virtual experiences. A group of 23 healthy participants (mean age 22.65 ± 5.48) were conducted through a single-session experience divided into four phases while their electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded. First, they were stressed via the Montreal imaging stress task (MIST), and then relaxed using our VR proposal. We applied the Wilcoxon test to evaluate the relaxation effect in terms of the EEG relative gamma and self-perceived stress surveys. The results that we obtained validate the effectiveness of our 360-degree proposal to significantly reduce stress (p-value = 0.0001). Furthermore, the participants deemed our proposal comfortable and immersive (score above 3.5 out of 5). These results suggest that 360-degree VR experiences can mitigate stress, reduce costs, and bring stress relief assistance closer to the general public, like in workplaces or homes.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it