MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405246388 · doi:10.1007/s10055-024-01074-0

Observation-based diminished reality: a systematic literature review

2024· article· en· W4405246388 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueVirtual Reality · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceVirtual realityComputer graphics (images)Data scienceHuman–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diminished reality (DR) is a set of techniques for visually removing unwanted objects within an environment in real time. This study attempts to carry out a systematic literature review to investigate the potential benefits, challenges, and efficacy of DR in various applications. To investigate the relevant studies, a classification framework with six aspects, namely, paper type, DR type, processing workflow, background data type, display device type, and DR environment, is provided. The relevant papers were mainly sourced from the Scopus academic database. From an initial number of 1284 papers published from 2000 to 2024, 67 were selected as key articles for analysis. Based on the findings, this study offers recommendations for implementing observation-based DR-supported functionality for AR applications going forward.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.897
Threshold uncertainty score0.859

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.269 · 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