MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401549566 · doi:10.1016/j.displa.2024.102807

Towards benchmarking VR sickness: A novel methodological framework for assessing contributing factors and mitigation strategies through rapid VR sickness induction and recovery

2024· article· en· W4401549566 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDisplays · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBenchmarkingMotion sicknessSimulator sicknessMedicineBusinessMarketingPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual Reality (VR) sickness remains a significant challenge in the widespread adoption of VR technologies. The absence of a standardized benchmark system hinders progress in understanding and effectively countering VR sickness. This paper proposes an initial step towards a benchmark system, utilizing a novel methodological framework to serve as a common platform for evaluating contributing VR sickness factors and mitigation strategies. Our benchmark, grounded in established theories and leveraging existing research, features both small and large environments. In two research studies, we validated our system by demonstrating its capability to (1) quickly, reliably, and controllably induce VR sickness in both environments, followed by a rapid decline post-stimulus, facilitating cost and time-effective within-subject studies and increased statistical power, (2) integrate and evaluate established VR sickness mitigation methods — static and dynamic field of view reduction, blur, and virtual nose — demonstrating their effectiveness in reducing symptoms in the benchmark and their direct comparison within a standardized setting. Our proposed benchmark also enables broader, more comparative research into different technical, setup, and participant variables influencing VR sickness and overall user experience, ultimately paving the way for building a comprehensive database to identify the most effective strategies for specific VR applications. • Novel methodological framework to standardize and benchmark VR sickness assessment. • Reliable and quick VR sickness induction with rapid recovery post-stimulus. • Minimal carry-over effects for cost- and time-effective within-subject studies. • Systematic comparison of static/dynamic FOV reduction, blur, virtual nose techniques. • Paving the way for building a comprehensive VR sickness database.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.116
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.272 · 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