Bibliographic record
Abstract
While discussing our current work-in-progress project, Virtual Aquapolis, we will consider two lines of inquiry: VR provides unique opportunities to explore inaccessible spaces, embody non-human forms, and offer radical new perspectives. How might we tell stories and create experiences that speak to this ecological moment using VR? This presentation explores the potential for VR to offer novel ways to connect with, or even embody, flora, fauna, environments and ecosystems. The rules for creating VR environments are still evolving: the grammar, aesthetics, and experiential possibilities developed in this early period will inform the future of the artform. As part of the above discussion, we will consider how VR might incorporate and expand on the storytelling strategies used in experimental realms and practices such as psychogeography, site-specific art, multimedia installation, interactive documentary and experimental film. This inquiry builds on the design document for our experimental VR work-in-progress project, Virtual Aquapolis, an interactive VR experience that invites users to explore the past, present and future of NY Harbor from beneath the surface of the water. Chronicling the harbor and its inhabitants through 500 years of radical change, users will experience how human culture and beliefs have altered NYC’s underwater ecosystems, and how the harbor has shaped the city above. Virtual Aquapolis leverages VR’s potential to explore inaccessible places and serve as a philosophical space, used to connect, not disconnect from one’s environment. While urban waterways are often considered sacrifice zones, our project examines the diversity and resilience of harbor ecosystems, challenging cultural distinctions between “urban” and “natural” by revealing how human culture works in tandem with the biosphere. Our proposed user-POV offers visitors the opportunity to become the water of the harbor itself: experiencing the world beneath the surface from the perspective of a collective, nebulous force. This experimental POV offers many challenges to current VR conventions. Here we examine the possibilities of VR to create new ecological experiences that speak to this ecological moment. Through this discussion, we hope to explore and discuss VR's potential to: Connect to real-world natural environments; Allow users to embody non-human and non-singular forms; Create immersive worlds that depart from the UXD conventions and aesthetic of gaming; Incorporate practices from experimental film, multimedia art installations, site-specific experiences and interactive documentary; Build on site-specific augmented reality and psychogeography practices.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.075 | 0.005 |
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".