MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Navigating Exoplanetary Systems in Augmented Reality: Preliminary Insights on ExoAR

2025· article· en· W7082444139 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExoplanetVisualizationCuriosityLimitingSpace explorationData visualizationKeplerAugmented reality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With thousands of exoplanets now confirmed by space missions such as NASA’s Kepler and TESS, scientific interest and public curiosity about these distant worlds continue to grow. However, current visualization tools for exploring exoplanetary systems often lack sufficient scientific accuracy or interactive features, limiting their educational effectiveness and analytical utility. To help address this gap, we developed ExoAR, an augmented reality tool designed to offer immersive, scientifically sound visualizations of all known exoplanetary systems using data directly sourced from NASA’s Exoplanet Archive. By leveraging augmented reality’s strengths, ExoAR enables users to immerse themselves in interactive, dynamic 3D models of these planetary systems with data-driven representations of planets and their host stars. The application also allows users to adjust various visualization scales independently, a capability designed to aid comprehension of comparative astronomical properties such as orbital mechanics, planetary sizes, and stellar classifications. To begin assessing ExoAR’s potential as an educational and analytical tool and inform future iterations, a pilot user study was conducted. Its findings indicate that participants found ExoAR improved user engagement and spatial understanding compared to NASA’s Eyes on Exoplanets application, a non-immersive exoplanetary system visualization tool. This work-in-progress paper presents these early insights, acknowledges current system limitations, and outlines future directions for more rigorously evaluating and further improving ExoAR’s capabilities for both educational and scientific communities.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designObservational
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 venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207