Evaluation of an audiovisual-FM system: Speechreading performance as a function of distance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A research program was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of an audiovisual-FM system as a speechreading aid. The present study investigated the effects of the distance between the talker and the speechreader on a visual-speech perception task. Sentences were recorded simultaneously with a conventional Hi8 mm video camera, and with the microcamera of an audiovisual-FM system. The recordings were obtained from two talkers at three different distances: 1.83 m, 3.66 m, and 7.32 m. Sixteen subjects completed a visual-keyword recognition task. The main results of the investigation were as follows: For the recordings obtained with the conventional video camera, there was a significant decrease in speechreading performance as the distance between the talker and the camera increased. For the recordings obtained with the microcamera of the audiovisual-FM system, there were no differences in speechreading as a function of the test distances. The findings of the investigation confirm that in a classroom setting the use of an audiovisual-FM system may constitute an effective way of overcoming the deleterious effects of distance on speechreading performance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".