MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Clinical Features-based Lifestyle Quantification Using Mobile Devices for Personalized Augmented Reality Intervention

2025· article· W4416402939 on OpenAlexaff
Taeyeon Kim, Eunhwa Song, Eun-Hee Jeong, Hyunjin Lee, Woontack Woo

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicAugmented Reality Applications
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
FundersKorea Institute for Advancement of Technology
KeywordsAugmented realityIntervention (counseling)Mobile devicePsychological interventionmHealthWorkforceHealth management systemEveryday life

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a lifestyle quantification method for personalized augmented reality (AR) intervention in everyday life. Maintaining a healthy lifestyle accompanies extensive workforce and costs, because accurate health evaluation and tailored management is a prerequisite. However, research on assessing multiple dimensions of health and timely administration of personalized information has been lacking. To address these issues, first we deduced participant’s physical activity, nutrition, interpersonal relations, and stress management level through their mobile devices. Each participant’s week-long data were filtered by clinical features evidenced in high-level medical literature. Next, based on their health status, we presented personalized AR interventions in their simulated everyday environment. Statistical analysis and user experiment results verified the clinical capability of our method and its effect on health-promoting decision behaviors of participants. Through this feasibility study, we hope to contribute on tailored lifestyle management in our daily lives, for better health of all.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.351 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAugmented Reality ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207