MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362679297 · doi:10.1145/3543507.3587432

Tangible Web: An Interactive Immersion Virtual Reality Creativity System that Travels Across Reality

2023· article· en· W4362679297 on OpenAlexaff
S. C. Yang, Ze Gao, Reza Hadi Mogavi, Pan Hui, Tristan Braud

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmersion (mathematics)Virtual realityAttractivenessExhibitionCreativityHuman–computer interactionComputer scienceMixed realityTourismAugmented realityArtificial realityMetaverseMultimediaComputer-mediated realityVisual artsPsychologyAestheticsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the advancement of virtual reality (VR) technology, virtual displays have become integral to how museums, galleries, and other tourist destinations present their collections to the public. However, the current lack of immersion in virtual reality displays limits the user’s ability to experience and appreciate its aesthetics. This paper presents a case study of a creative approach taken by a tourist attraction venue in developing a physical network system that allows visitors to enhance VR’s aesthetic aspects based on environmental parameters gathered by external sensors. Our system was collaboratively developed through interviews and sessions with twelve stakeholder groups interested in art and exhibitions. This paper demonstrates how our technological advancements in interaction, immersion and visual attractiveness surpass those of earlier virtual display generations. Through multimodal interaction, we aim to encourage innovation on the Web and create more visually appealing and engaging virtual displays. It is hoped that the greater online art community will gain fresh insight into how people interact with virtual worlds as a result of this work.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207