MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215802962 · doi:10.1145/3386201.3386206

Making despite Material Constraints with Augmented Reality-Mediated Prototyping

2020· article· en· W3215802962 on OpenAlexafffund
Sowmya Somanath, Lora Oehlberg, Ehud Sharlin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Victoria
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAugmented realityFidelityLeverage (statistics)Rapid prototypingComputer scienceElectronicsHuman–computer interactionSystems engineeringSoftware engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a discussion on designing an Augmented Reality (AR)-based prototyping approach to help makers continue building low-fidelity physical computing projects despite material constraints and demonstrate an example, Polymorphic Cube (PMC). Lack of immediate or easy access to electronics is a roadblock to building physical computing projects. We present AR-mediated prototyping as an approach where mobile AR can be used to simulate missing I/O components in-situ during electronics prototyping. Using our suggested approach makers can build a circuit with available real-world materials, substitute the missing components using any augmented physical proxy, and continue implementation tinkering and interaction with the hybrid circuit. Evaluation of PMC demonstrated that users can leverage computing to overcome the lack of electronic components and build low-fidelity prototypes to support design thinking. Our study revealed the benefits and limitations of our current prototype system and encourages future explorations into an AR-mediated prototyping approach to making.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0040.008
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207