MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110576487 · doi:10.1145/642611.642694

Multimodal 'eyes-free' interaction techniques for wearable devices

2003· article· en· W2110576487 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen Brewster, Jo Lumsden, Marek Bell, Malcolm Hall, Stuart Tasker

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicInteractive and Immersive Displays
Canadian institutionsResearch and Productivity Council
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsWearable computerComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionWearable technologyMultimodal interactionEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile and wearable computers present input/output prob-lems due to limited screen space and interaction techniques. When mobile, users typically focus their visual attention on navigating their environment - making visually demanding interface designs hard to operate. This paper presents two multimodal interaction techniques designed to overcome these problems and allow truly mobile, 'eyes-free' device use. The first is a 3D audio radial pie menu that uses head gestures for selecting items. An evaluation of a range of different audio designs showed that egocentric sounds re-duced task completion time, perceived annoyance, and al-lowed users to walk closer to their preferred walking speed. The second is a sonically enhanced 2D gesture recognition system for use on a belt-mounted PDA. An evaluation of the system with and without audio feedback showed users' ges-tures were more accurate when dynamically guided by au-dio-feedback. These novel interaction techniques demon-strate effective alternatives to visual-centric interface de-signs on mobile devices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations264
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInteractive and Immersive DisplaysFrench-language works237,207