MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2770439958 · doi:10.5539/ies.v10n12p30

The Development of SAH Reading Passage Compendium: A Tool for the Assessment of Reading Performance Related to Visual Function

2017· article· en· W2770439958 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ai−Hong Chen, Buari Noor Halilah, Shauqiah Jufri

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Higher Education, Malaysia
KeywordsMalayReading (process)Computer scienceReadabilitySentenceFluencyWords per minuteArtificial intelligenceNatural language processingPsychologyLinguisticsMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Passages with continuous sentences are commonly used for the assessment of reading performance related to visual function, and rehabilitation in optometric practices. Passages created in native languages are crucial for a reliable interpretation in a real scenario. This study aimed to report the development of SAH Reading Passage Compendium (SAHRPC), as a tool for the assessment of reading performance related to visual function. SAHRPC uses the Malay language as the medium of communication. The development of the SAHRPC encompassed three stages: exploratory, confirmatory and prototyping. In the exploratory stage, 300 sentences were extracted from the standard school textbook (in the Malay language) endorsed by the Ministry of Education, Malaysia. The accumulated reading materials were processed based on two deciding factors: continuous sentence structure and predetermined total number of words. A total of 56 passages were constructed with equal readability, based on a simple “5 continuous sentences structure of 50 words” combination. In the confirmatory stage, the 56 passages were verified by normal sighted native Malay speakers. The reading duration was measured using a stopwatch, while the errors were recorded using an audiotape. Reading speed was quantified in words per minute (wpm). Three passages were first eliminated based on the outliers present in the boxplot graph. Eleven passages were further eliminated based on the 10 % highest error and 5 % of the two extreme ends of the reading speed range. The remaining 42 passages with good reliability were randomly compiled into 3 sets of 13 passages. Thirteen passages in each set were randomly sorted into 13 print sizes, ranged from 1.2 logMAR to 0.0 logMAR. The interchangeability of the 3 sets was inspected and confirmed. A prototype was developed and packaged as the SAHRPC, to be used as a tool for the assessment of reading performance related to visual function, and rehabilitation purposes.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.350 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207