MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387968308 · doi:10.1145/3581783.3613810

Understanding User Behavior in Volumetric Video Watching: Dataset, Analysis and Prediction

2023· article· en· W4387968308 on OpenAlexaff
Kaiyuan Hu, Haowen Yang, Yili Jin, Junhua Liu, Yongting Chen, Miao Zhang, Fangxin Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityMcGill University
FundersBasic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsViewportComputer scienceInteractivityVoxelPolygon meshVirtual realityMultimediaHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Volumetric video emerges as a new attractive video paradigm in recent years since it provides an immersive and interactive 3D viewing experience with six degree-of-freedom (DoF). Unlike traditional 2D or panoramic videos, volumetric videos require dense point clouds, voxels, meshes, or huge neural models to depict volumetric scenes, which results in a prohibitively high bandwidth burden for video delivery. Users' behavior analysis, especially the viewport and gaze analysis, then plays a significant role in prioritizing the content streaming within users' viewport and degrading the remaining content to maximize user QoE with limited bandwidth. Although understanding user behavior is crucial, to the best of our best knowledge, there are no available 3D volumetric video viewing datasets containing fine-grained user interactivity features, not to mention further analysis and behavior prediction.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.144
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations32
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207