Acesso ao computador: comparação do desempenho de jovens com diferentes dispositivos de entrada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Há diferentes dispositivos para facilitar o acesso ao computador, porém, poucos estudos para verificar a eficácia dos mesmos. O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar o desempenho de jovens ao utilizarem dispositivos de acesso ao computador. Participaram do estudo cinquenta jovens saudáveis com idades entre 15 e 25 anos. Para a coleta de dados foi utilizado computador com tela sensível ao toque, mouse e o Camera Mouse. Foram utilizados três softwares para avaliar tempo de reação e acurácia dos participantes: Discrete Aiming Task, Tracking Task e Single Switch Performance Test. Para conhecer o grau de satisfação de uso dos dispositivos, foi utilizado o Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology. O resultados demonstraram que nas atividades de precisão e tempo de reação, o mouse e a toque na tela foram os dispositivos que geraram os melhores desempenhos. Conclui-se que, o Camera Mouse foi o dispositivo que gerou os piores desempenhos.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".