MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Robust Smartphone Screen Integration with Deep Learning for Virtual Reality Pass-through

2025· article· en· W4413680157 on OpenAlexaff
Lucas Hartman, Ethan Pigou, Nicholas Strzelczyk, Santiago Gomez-Rosero, Miriam A. M. Capretz

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionAugmented realityDeep learningMultimediaComputer graphics (images)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual reality is revolutionizing immersive experiences, yet the seamless integration of everyday devices, such as smartphones, remains a challenging frontier. This paper presents a method for dynamically integrating a live smartphone screen into the virtual reality pass-through view. Our approach leverages a lightweight convolutional neural network (CNN) to detect the smartphone in real time, accurately determining its position, scale, and orientation within the camera feed. By synchronizing live screen capture with inertial sensor data, our system computes precise affine transformations that ensure the overlay remains perfectly aligned with its physical counterpart, even during rapid movements. Experimental evaluations demonstrate that our solution achieves an average of 29.2 detection runs per second, delivering a stable and high-fidelity integration without the need for additional hardware. Evaluations also showed a 0.44 increase in detection F1 score during live comparisons to the baseline alternative, which does not use deep learning. This dynamic overlay enhances visual clarity and interaction in virtual reality and bridges the gap between virtual and real-world interfaces, empowering users to access notifications, messages, and productivity applications seamlessly.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207