MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prototyping a Spatial Skills AR Authoring Tool for Partially Sighted, Blind, and Sighted Individuals

2022· article· en· W4320057814 on OpenAlexaff
Erin Lee, Mitali Kamat, Lucas Temor, Christopher Schiafone, Lillian Fan, Jessie Liu, Peter Coppin, Álvaro Uribe-Quevedo, Robert Ingino, Ali Syed, David Rojas, Teresa Lee, Sharman Perera, Adam Dubrowski, Mahadeo A. Sukhai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsCNIB FoundationUniversity of TorontoOntario Tech UniversityOntario College of Art and DesignLakeridge Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAffordanceComputer scienceAugmented realityHuman–computer interactionMultimediaContext (archaeology)VisualizationField (mathematics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spatial skills are critical for understanding the relations among objects and people, playing an important role in how we interact with the world. Spatial relationships are built through interactions with physical objects; however, in computational/online environments, these change to bi-dimensional media and computer-assisted design comprised of 3D representations viewable through a flat screen. Due to spatial immersion and interaction limitations, a traditional 2D and 3D approach presents challenges to partially sighted, blind, and sighted individuals. This paper presents the prototyping of a co-design Augmented Reality (AR) authoring tool by recruiting inclusive emerging affordances of consumer-level AR technologies within the context of current e-learning provisions in subject matters, including inclusive design, engineering design, game hardware design, and health sciences. This work has been inspired by the COVID-19 pandemic that has shown the need to level the field in inclusive design for teaching a subject typically oriented to the sighted. Our prototype allows users to create e-learning content for visualization, interaction, collaboration, and inclusive learning. Future work will investigate our tool's impact on skills development and content creation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207