MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4299951465 · doi:10.5383/juspn.09.01.003

Improved SingleTapBraille: Developing a single tap text entry method based on Grade 1 and 2 braille encoding

2017· article· en· W4299951465 on OpenAlexaffvenue

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ubiquitous Systems and Pervasive Networks · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersTaif UniversitySaudi Arabian Cultural Bureau
KeywordsTouchscreenBrailleComputer scienceText entryVisually impairedHuman–computer interactionThumbObject (grammar)GestureComputer visionArtificial intelligenceOperating systemMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Touchscreen technology has brought about significant improvements for both normal sighted and visually impaired people. Visually impaired people tend to use touchscreen devices because these devices support a screen reader function, providing a cheaper, smaller alternative to screen reader machines. However, most of the available touchscreen keyboards are still largely inaccessible to blind and visually impaired people because they require the user to find an object location on a touchscreen in order to interact with an application. In this paper, we describe SingleTapBraille, a novel nonvisual text input approach for touchscreen devices. With SingleTapBraille, a user enters characters including text, numbers, and punctuations by tapping anywhere on the screen with one finger or a thumb several times based on braille patterns. This paper presents our initial keyboard design to enter Grade 1 and our explorative evaluation of SingleTapBraille conducted with braille instructors and visually impaired users. It also presents the implementation of Grade 2 and an initial evaluation of the improved SingleTapBraille keyboard with a blind user.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.004

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ubiquitous Systems and Pervasive NetworksSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207