Computational Methods to Support Prototyping of an Adaptive Robot Joystick Controller for Children with Upper Limb Impairments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Between 2% to 5% of children are affected by Developmental Coordination Disorders in Canada and have been diagnosed with upper limb impairments, which affect their daily lives and reduces their autonomy. Motor impairments can be part of progressive disorders, so despite regular therapy, progress remains fleeting. Affected individuals therefore consistently face many barriers, including entertainment opportunities, as availability of off-the-shelf inclusive technology is very limited. Our long-term goal is to develop a play-mediator robot, which would facilitate play between children with motor impairments and their peers or family members. Here, games that the robot can play are remotely controlled by the participants, using appropriate interfaces (e.g. joysticks). In this paper, we take the first step towards that goal and develop an adaptive joystick controller that can compensate for individual deficits. We monitor movement statistics to determine if re-calibration of the controller is necessary. Moreover, we propose a computational model of data ‘distortion’, as a tool for developers to test their technology in the very early stages of prototype development, without requiring access to participants. This work is validated with data from healthy adults and children with upper limb impairments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".