MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064369689 · doi:10.1109/have.2011.6088405

A prototype Haptic E-Book system to support immersive remote reading in a smart space

2011· article· en· W2064369689 on OpenAlexaff
A. Rahman, Kazi Masudul Alam, Abdulmotaleb El Saddik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaptic technologyReading (process)Computer scienceMultimediaHuman–computer interactionModality (human–computer interaction)EntertainmentVocabularyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interactive book reading contributes profoundly to the language development in preschool students. Experimental research showed that shared book-reading between adults and children provides children with the opportunity to acquire new vocabulary. Moreover, the time spent reading together provides clear evidence to a child of a parent's love and care [1]. Inspired by such, we propose a remote reading framework in which parents or grandparents remotely participate in remote reading sessions. In this framework, we present an intuitive annotation based approach of hapto-audio-visual interaction with the traditional digital learning materials. We argue that picture and haptic modality enhanced book reading accelerates language development as students can relate the text with a known visual and tactile references. Hence, in the proposed Haptic E-Book system, by integrating the home entertainment system in the user's reading experience combined with haptic interfaces we examine whether such augmentation of modalities influence the user's learning behaviour. The proposed Haptic E-Book (HE-Book) system leverages the haptic jacket, haptic arm band as well as haptic sofa interfaces to provide haptic emotive signals to the remote story listener in the form of patterned vibrations of the actuators and expresses the learning material by incorporating image based augmented display in order to pave ways for intimate, shared, and immersive reading experience in the popular ebook platform.

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)0.001
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207