Taking into account the specific aspects of the young public with TSA in the evaluation of a dedicated application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The design and evaluation of a tool, whether informatic or not, impacts its life cycle. IT tools are increasingly present on a daily basis. Specific audiences now benefit easily. But do these dedicated tools meet their expectations? Typically, it is customary to call on the end users themselves to respond. However, the latter, depending on their profiles, are not always able to respond. In the case of this study, we want to evaluate an application dedicated to a young audience with ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorders). This very specific audience encounters, among other things, difficulties in the field of communication. Many evaluation methods rely on verbal exchanges with the user. What role will children have with ASD in the evaluation phase of their tool? This audience benefits from constant support (family, medical and educational teams). Can these caregivers support the child in the evaluation process, and if so how? La conception et l'évaluation d'un outil, informatique ou non, impacte son cycle de vie. Les outils informatiques sont de plus en plus présents au quotidien. Les publics spécifiques en bénéficient aujourd'hui facilement. Mais ces outils dédiés correspondent-ils à leurs attentes ? De manière classique, il est de coutume de faire appel aux utilisateurs finaux eux-mêmes pour répondre. Cependant, ces derniers, en fonction de leurs profils, ne sont pas toujours en capacité de répondre. Dans le cas de cette étude, nous souhaitons évaluer une application dédiée à un jeune public avec TSA (Troubles du Spectre Autistique). Ce public, très spécifique, rencontre entre autres, des difficultés dans le domaine de la communication. Or de nombreuses méthodes d'évaluation reposent sur les échanges verbaux avec l'utilisateur. Quelle place va donc avoir l'enfant avec TSA dans la phase d'évaluation de son outil ? Ce public bénéficie d'un accompagnement constant (famille, équipes médicales et éducatives). Ces accompagnant peuvent-ils soutenir l'enfant dans la démarche d'évaluation, et si oui comment ?
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".