Qubec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with assistive Technology(QUEST 2.0) 국내적용을 위한 번역연구
Bibliographic record
Abstract
이 연구는 보조공학기구와 그와 관련된 보조공학서비스를 경험한 사용자의 만족도를 평가하기 위한 외국의 평가도구인 퀘백 보조공학 사용자 만족도 평가도구(Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction assistive Technology, QUEST 2.0)를 체계적인 번역절차에 따라 국내 문화에 맞게 한글로 번역하고 검증하여 한국어판 퀘백 보조공학 사용자 만족도 평가도구(한국어판 QUEST 2.0)를 개발함으로써 국내 보조공학 현장의 현장 전문가, 연구자들이 보조공학 성과를 평가하고자 할 때 유용하게 제공함과 동시에 실제 보조공학이 장애인 개인의 욕구를 충족시키고, 기능개선의 효과가 있는지에 대한 만족을 평가할 수 있도록 하는데 의의가 있으며, 올바른 보조공학기기의 적용을 위한 기초자료를 제공할 수 있을 것이다.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".