MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074572920 · doi:10.5555/1413907.1413908

A quality of experience model for haptic user interfaces

2008· article· en· W2074572920 on OpenAlex
Abdelwahab Hamam, Mohamad Eid, Abdulmotaleb El Saddik, Nicolas D. Georganas

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAmbient Media and Systems · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaptic technologyComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionUnified Modeling LanguageUser interfaceGraphical user interfaceModality (human–computer interaction)Quality (philosophy)User experience designMultimediaSimulationSoftware

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multimedia systems and applications have recently started to integrate the sense of touch and force feedback in the human-computer interaction. Surprisingly, measuring the quality of experience when haptic modality is incorporated in a graphical user interface has received limited attention from the research community. In this paper, we propose a taxonomy for measuring the quality of experience of a haptic user interface (HUI) applications. Furthermore, the taxonomy is modeled using a mathematical model. Finally, the proposed model is evaluated using two HUI-based applications: the haptic learning system and the haptic enabled UML CASE tool. The performance evaluation demonstrated that the proposed model is capable of reflecting the user estimation of the applications.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.185
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.165 · 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