Usability assessment of ASIBOT: a portable robot to aid patients with spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The usability concept refers to aspects related to the use of products that are closely linked to the user's degree of satisfaction. Our goal is to present a functional evaluation methodology for assessing the usability of sophisticated technical aids, such as a portable robot for helping disabled patients with severe spinal cord injuries. The specific manipulator used for this task is ASIBOT, a personal assistance robot totally developed by RoboticsLab at the University Carlos III of Madrid. Our purpose is also to improve some aspects of the manipulator according to the user's perception. For our case study, a population of six patients with spinal cord injury is considered. These patients have been suffering spinal cord injuries for a period of time longer than 1 year before the tests are carried out. The methodology followed for the information gathering is based on the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology (QUEST). Different daily functions, such as drinking, brushing one's teeth and washing one's face, are considered to assess the user's perception when using ASIBOT as a technical aid. The human factor in this procedure is the main base to establish the specific needs and tools to make the end product more suitable and usable.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".