Effects of AI-Powered Embodied Avatars on Communication Quality and Social Connection in Asynchronous Virtual Meetings
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
Immersive technologies such as virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR) allow remote users to meet and interact in a shared virtual space using embodied virtual avatars, creating a sense of co-presence. However, asynchronous communication-essential in many real-world contexts-remains underexplored in these environments. Traditional playback-based systems lack interactivity and often fail to preserve critical contextual cues necessary for effective asynchronous communication. In this paper, we introduce AVAGENTs, AI-powered virtual avatars that replicate users' verbal and nonverbal cues from recordings of past meetings. Avagents can interpret meeting context and generate appropriate responses to questions posed by asynchronous viewers. Through a user study (N = 30), we evaluated Avagents against a traditional playback method and a voice-based AI assistant across two asynchronous meeting scenarios: analytic reasoning and affective resonance. Results showed that Avagents enhance the asynchronous communication experience by increasing social presence, sense of belonging, emotional intimacy, and other user perceptions. We discuss the findings and their implications for designing effective AI-driven asynchronous communication tools in VR/AR environments.
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 | 0.001 | 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