MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2333701406 · doi:10.1061/40794(179)102

Speech — Enabled Handheld Computing for Fieldwork

2005· article· en· W2333701406 on OpenAlexafffund
Irina Kondratova

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and dialogue systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNational Research Council CanadaU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsMobile deviceComputer scienceMobile phoneStylusField (mathematics)Human–computer interactionMobile computingModalitiesMultimodal interactionMobile telephonyMultimediaPhoneMobile radioTelecommunicationsWorld Wide WebComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses the advantages and challenges of using speech recognition on mobile devices, for field data collection and real-time communication. Multimodal and voice technology, for speech-enabled information retrieval and input, using mobile phones or handheld computing devices is explained. Multimodal technology enables more complete information communication and supports timely and effective decision-making. It also helps to overcome the limitations imposed by the small screen of mobile devices. The paper describes several prototype, industrial, mobile solutions developed for the field entry of data and real-time communication that utilize voice and multimodal interaction. In one of these projects, a field concrete inspector can enter inspection results using variable interaction modalities such as speech, stylus, or keyboard on a handheld device, or speech-only on a mobile phone. The author describes prototype applications developed, and presents several usage scenarios for field and maintenance applications, as well as for emergency response.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.005

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSpeech and dialogue systemsFrench-language works237,207