MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

An Approach for Automatic Adaptation of Serious Games Applied to Virtual Motor Rehabilitation

2024· article· en· W4401880341 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandre Kira, Rodrigo Garcia Pontes, Luciano Vieira de Araújo, Carlos Bandeira de Mello Monteiro, Álvaro Uribe-Quevedo, Fátima L. S. Nunes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptation (eye)Computer scienceRehabilitationHuman–computer interactionPsychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual rehabilitation has seen the use of game design principles to create serious games and exergames aimed at further involving the patient in therapy to increase adherence and compliance. The addition of game design elements to the therapeutic context can keep patients engaged throughout the exercises, which are characterized as repetitive and monotonous. Studies involving virtual rehabilitation with the use of serious games have obtained promising results, but there are still challenges regarding the possibility of automatic adaptation based on metrics associated with the limitations and needs of each individual. This paper proposes an approach to automatic adaptation to serious games applied to virtual motor rehabilitation. A game was developed as a proof of concept and experiments were conducted with physiotherapists and typical users to evaluate the feasibility of applying it in real therapy sessions. The results indicate the preference of physiotherapists for games with automatic adaptation, which demonstrates positive attitudes toward integrating this technology into rehabilitation practices. Usability feedback from healthcare professionals and typical users suggested ease of interaction and highlighted areas for improvement, including the potential of virtual rehabilitation games to optimize therapy outcomes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score0.248

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207