MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308990731 · doi:10.1145/3567713

Conductor: Intersection-Based Bimanual Pointing in Augmented and Virtual Reality

2022· article· en· W4308990731 on OpenAlexaff
Futian Zhang, Keiko Katsuragawa, Edward Lank

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConductorComputer scienceLeverage (statistics)Intersection (aeronautics)Virtual realityHuman–computer interactionCursor (databases)Selection (genetic algorithm)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pointing is an elementary interaction in virtual and augmented reality environments, and, to effectively support selection, techniques must deal with the challenges of occlusion and depth specification. Most of the previous techniques require two explicit steps to handle occlusion. In this paper, we propose Conductor, an intuitive, plane-ray, intersection-based, 3D pointing technique where users leverage bimanual input to control a ray and intersecting plane. Conductor allows users to use the non-dominant hand to adjust the cursor distance on the ray while pointing with the dominant hand. We evaluate Conductor against Raycursor, a state-of-the-art VR pointing technique, and show that Conductor outperforms Raycursor for selection tasks. Given our results, we argue that bimanual selection techniques merit additional exploration to support object selection and placement within virtual environments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.315
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.048
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionSame topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207