Testing usability and trainability of indirect touch interaction: perspective for the next generation of air traffic control systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to determine whether indirect touch device can be used to interact with graphical objects displayed on another screen in an air traffic control (ATC) context. The introduction of such a device likely requires an adaptation of the sensory-motor system. The operator has to simultaneously perform movements on the horizontal plane while assessing them on the vertical plane. Thirty-six right-handed participants performed movement training with either constant or variable practice and with or without visual feedback of the displacement of their actions. Participants then performed a test phase without visual feedback. Performance improved in both practice conditions, but accuracy was higher with visual feedback. During the test phase, movement time was longer for those who had practiced with feedback, suggesting an element of dependency. However, this 'cost' of feedback did not extend to movement accuracy. Finally, participants who had received variable training performed better in the test phase, but accuracy was still unsatisfactory. We conclude that continuous visual feedback on the stylus position is necessary if tablets are to be introduced in ATC.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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".