MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403307315 · doi:10.1145/3665463.3678815

Paintings in the Age of VR Reproductions: Examining the Design of Virtual Reality Galleries

2024· article· en· W4403307315 on OpenAlexaff
Samira Soltani, Daniel Harley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooToronto Metropolitan University
FundersUniversitas Brawijaya
KeywordsVirtual realityPaintingComputer scienceComputer graphics (images)Human–computer interactionMixed realityArtMultimediaVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Galleries, museums, and designers have been adopting virtual reality (VR) technologies to display paintings and create novel experiences with artwork. We contribute an analysis of 20 examples of these applications to examine the design of VR reproductions of existing paintings, raising questions about how art is mediated by VR applications. Our findings show that current design strategies dominantly reproduce many of the relatively passive characteristics of a traditional museum experience, signalling opportunities for design that leverages the affordances of VR to offer additional spatial, embodied, and playful experiences with paintings.

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)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207