MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143338533 · doi:10.1109/icvr.2008.4625149

Analysis of movement to develop a virtual reality powered-wheelchair simulator

2008· article· en· W2143338533 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe S. Archambault, François Routhier, Mathieu Hamel, Patrick Boissy

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish Rehabilitation HospitalUniversité de SherbrookeDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityWheelchairSimulationAccelerationComputer scienceSAFERDriving simulatorMotion (physics)Movement (music)Human–computer interactionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children with limitations in mobility greatly benefit from training to acquire the skills necessary for the safe operation of a powered wheelchair (PW). Proper training leads to safer and more frequent use of the PW, which in turn has an important impact on quality of life. Training can be difficult to accomplish, especially in children with sever physical or cognitive disabilities. A virtual reality based simulator may constitute an adequate solution for the practice of PW driving skills in these individuals, by providing a graded training program in a safe environment. We propose to build a simulator that would incorporate three-dimensional visual feedback using VR equipment, as well as inertial feedback through the use of a motion platform. This would provide a realistic setting, as users would experience the appropriate inertial forces that accompany acceleration, rotation and changes in inclination during PW driving. The programming of these forces relies on the measurement of movement in a real PW. We report here the results of a first experiment involving the measurement of acceleration during various PW driving tasks, including starting, stopping, turning and moving on inclined planes. Our analyses indicate that the movement of a real PW could be adequately reproduced by the motion platform. Implications for the design of the simulator are discussed.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.112
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.335 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207