Predicting Human Performance in Vertical Hierarchical Menu Selection in Immersive AR Using Hand-gesture and Head-gaze
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are currently limited guidelines on designing user interfaces (UI) for immersive augmented reality (AR) applications. Designers must reflect on their experience designing UI for desktop and mobile applications and conjecture how a UI will influence AR users’ performance. In this work, we introduce a predictive model for determining users’ performance for a target UI without the subsequent involvement of participants in user studies. The model is trained on participants’ responses to objective performance measures such as consumed endurance (CE) and pointing time (PT) using hierarchical drop-down menus. Large variability in the depth and context of the menus is ensured by randomly and dynamically creating the hierarchical drop-down menus and associated user tasks from words contained in the lexical database WordNet. Subjective performance bias is reduced by incorporating the users’ non-verbal standard performance WAIS-IV during the model training. The semantic information of the menu is encoded using the Universal Sentence Encoder. We present the results of a user study that demonstrates that the proposed predictive model achieves high accuracy in predicting the CE on hierarchical menus of users with various cognitive abilities. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work on predicting CE in designing UI for immersive AR applications.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".