XCam: Mixed-Initiative Virtual Cinematography for Live Production of Virtual Reality Experiences
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
VR is often utilized for organizing virtual events such as meetings, conferences, and concerts; however, support for live production is lacking in most existing VR tools.We present XCam, a toolkit enabling mixed-initiative control over virtual camera systems-from fully manual control by users to increasingly automated, systemdriven control with minimal user intervention.XCam's architectural design separates the concerns of object tracking, camera motion, and scene transition, giving more degrees of freedom to operators who can adjust the level of automation along all three dimensions.We used XCam to conduct two studies: (1) interviews with six VR content creators probe into what aspects should and shouldn't be automated based on six applications developed with XCam; (2) three workshops with experts explore XCam's utility in live production of an interactive VR flm sequence, a lecture on cinematography, and an alumni meeting in social VR.Expert feedback from our studies suggests how to balance automation and control, and the opportunities and limits of future AI-driven tools.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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