RealitySummary: Exploring On-Demand Mixed Reality Text Summarization and Question Answering using Large Language Models
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large Language Models (LLMs) are gaining popularity as reading and summarization aids. However, little is known about their potential benefits when integrated with mixed reality (MR) interfaces to support everyday reading. In this iterative investigation, we developed RealitySummary, an MR reading assistant that seamlessly integrates LLMs with always-on camera access, OCR-based text extraction, and augmented spatial and visual responses. Developed iteratively, RealitySummary evolved across three versions, each shaped by user feedback and reflective analysis: 1) a preliminary user study to understand reader perceptions (N=12), 2) an in-the-wild deployment to explore real-world usage (N=11), and 3) a diary study to capture insights from real-world work contexts (N=5). Our empirical studies' findings highlight the unique advantages of combining AI and MR, including always-on implicit assistance, long-term temporal history, minimal context switching, and spatial affordances, demonstrating significant potential for future LLM-MR interfaces beyond traditional screen-based interactions.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it