Virtual Reality in Chinese Modern Video Art and Cultural Design Application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the rapid development of virtual reality technology, its application in the field of art and design is attracting increasing attention.Based on the perspective of user demand, the article combines the Kano model to analyze user satisfaction with virtual reality technology used in modern Chinese image culture design, and finds that its landing point is the desired attribute in the first quadrant, with the Better and Worse coefficients of 0.531 and -0.141, respectively, which indicates that users expect the application of virtual reality technology in the design of image art and culture.Then the evaluation index system of VR image art and culture design is constructed, and the principal component analysis method is used to assign weights and establish the quantitative model of VR image art and culture design.The analysis shows that the weight of the sensory level is the largest 0.3780, and users attach great importance to the aesthetic experience (0.3780) and emotional experience (0.2710) of VR image art and culture design.The application of virtual reality can draw on the results of the quantitative model to design optimization strategies, combine traditional and modern elements, use the interactivity of VR to enhance artistic expression, create an immersive experience, and create more in-depth and original works of video art and culture.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".