The Industrial Track of EuroVR 2018 \nProceedings of the 15th Annual EuroVR Conference
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We are pleased to present these conference proceedings in the VTT Technology series, the \npapers accepted for the Industrial Track of EuroVR 2018, the 15th annual EuroVR conference, \nSavoy Place, London, United Kingdom, 22nd to 23th October 2018. \nIn previous years the EuroVR conference has been held in Bremen (2014), Lecco (2015), Athens \n(2016), and Laval (2017). This series was initiated in 2004 by the INTUITION Network of \nExcellence in Virtual and Augmented Reality, supported by the European Commission until \n2008, and incorporated within the Joint Virtual Reality Conferences (JVRC) from 2009 to 2013. \nThe focus of the EuroVR conferences is to present, each year, novel Virtual Reality (VR), Mixed \nReality (MR) and Augmented Reality (AR) technologies, including software systems, display \ntechnologies, interaction devices, and applications, to foster engagement between industry, \nacademia, and the public sector, and to promote the development and deployment of \nVR/MR/AR technologies in new, emerging, and existing fields. This annual event of the EuroVR \nassociation (https://www.eurovr-association.org/) provides a unique platform for exchange \nbetween researchers, technology providers, and end users around commercial or research \napplications. \nThis publication is a collection of the industrial papers presented at the conference. It provides \nan interesting perspective into current and future industrial applications of VR/AR/MR. The \nIndustrial Track is an opportunity for industry to tell the research and development \ncommunities what they use the technologies for, to say what they really think about VR/AR/MR, \nand to explain their needs now and in the future. You will find presentations from large and \nsmall industries from all over Europe and beyond. \nWe would like to warmly thank the industrial committee chairs for their great support and \ncommitment to the conference, and special thanks go to the local organizing committee for \ntheir great effort in making this event happen . \nEnjoy your time in London! \nOn behalf of the organising committee, \nEuroVR IPC member and Principal Scientist at VTT \nTechnical Research Centre of Finland Ltd., Finland \nResearch Fellow and Lecturer at School of Simulation \nand Visualisation, Glasgow School of Arts, UK
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".