MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225016355 · doi:10.1145/3491102.3501884

In-Depth Mouse: Integrating Desktop Mouse into Virtual Reality

2022· article· en· W4225016355 on OpenAlexaff
Qian Zhou, George Fitzmaurice, Fraser Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsAutodesk (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCursor (databases)Computer scienceVirtual realityUSableComputer visionWorkloadPointing deviceImmersion (mathematics)Depth perceptionArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionStereo displayComputer graphics (images)MultimediaPerception

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual Reality (VR) has potential for productive knowledge work, however, midair pointing with controllers or hand gestures does not offer the precision and comfort of traditional 2D mice. Directly integrating mice into VR is difficult as selecting targets in a 3D space is negatively impacted by binocular rivalry, perspective mismatch, and improperly calibrated control-display (CD) gain. To address these issues, we developed Depth-Adaptive Cursor , a 2D-mouse driven pointing technique for 3D selection with depth-adaptation that continuously interpolates the cursor depth by inferring what users intend to select based on the cursor position, the viewpoint, and the selectable objects. Depth-Adaptive Cursor uses a novel CD gain tool to compute a usable range of CD gains for general mouse-based pointing in VR. A user study demonstrated that Depth-Adaptive Cursor significantly improved performance compared with an existing mouse-based pointing technique without depth-adaption in terms of time (21.2%), error (48.3%), perceived workload, and user satisfaction.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations104
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsSame topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207