Connect Brain, a Mobile App for Studying Depth Perception in Angiography Visualization: Gamification Study (Preprint)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<sec> <title>BACKGROUND</title> One of the bottlenecks of visualization research is the lack of volunteers for studies that evaluate new methods and paradigms. The increased availability of web-based marketplaces, combined with the possibility of implementing volume rendering, a computationally expensive method, on mobile devices, has opened the door for using gamification in the context of medical image visualization studies. </sec> <sec> <title>OBJECTIVE</title> We aimed to describe a gamified study that we conducted with the goal of comparing several cerebrovascular visualization techniques and to evaluate whether gamification is a valid paradigm for conducting user studies in the domain of medical imaging. </sec> <sec> <title>METHODS</title> The study was implemented in the form of a mobile game, <i>Connect Brain</i>, which was developed and distributed on both Android (Google LLC) and iOS (Apple Inc) platforms. Connect Brain features 2 minigames: one asks the player to make decisions about the depth of different vessels, and the other asks the player to determine whether 2 vessels are connected. </sec> <sec> <title>RESULTS</title> The gamification paradigm, which allowed us to collect many data samples (5267 and 1810 for the depth comparison and vessel connectivity tasks, respectively) from many participants (N=111), yielded similar results regarding the effectiveness of visualization techniques to those of smaller in-laboratory studies. </sec> <sec> <title>CONCLUSIONS</title> The results of our study suggest that the gamification paradigm not only is a viable alternative to traditional in-laboratory user studies but could also present some advantages. </sec>
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".