MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321649027 · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581449

Teachable Reality: Prototyping Tangible Augmented Reality with Everyday Objects by Leveraging Interactive Machine Teaching

2023· preprint· en· W4321649027 on OpenAlexafffund
Kyzyl Monteiro, Ritik Vatsal, Neil Chulpongsatorn, Aman Parnami, Ryo Suzuki

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsAugmented realityHuman–computer interactionComputer scienceRapid prototypingContext (archaeology)Flexibility (engineering)MultimediaMixed realityUser interfaceComputer-mediated realityEngineeringProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper introduces Teachable Reality, an augmented reality (AR) prototyping tool for creating interactive tangible AR applications with arbitrary everyday objects. Teachable Reality leverages vision-based interactive machine teaching (e.g., Teachable Machine), which captures real-world interactions for AR prototyping. It identifies the user-defined tangible and gestural interactions using an on-demand computer vision model. Based on this, the user can easily create functional AR prototypes without programming, enabled by a trigger-action authoring interface. Therefore, our approach allows the flexibility, customizability, and generalizability of tangible AR applications that can address the limitation of current marker-based approaches. We explore the design space and demonstrate various AR prototypes, which include tangible and deformable interfaces, context-aware assistants, and body-driven AR applications. The results of our user study and expert interviews confirm that our approach can lower the barrier to creating functional AR prototypes while also allowing flexible and general-purpose prototyping experiences.

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)0.004
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations53
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207