MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402054155 · doi:10.3390/ijerph21091150

QuickPic AAC: An AI-Based Application to Enable Just-in-Time Generation of Topic-Specific Displays for Persons Who Are Minimally Speaking

2024· article· en· W4402054155 on OpenAlexaff
Christina Yu, Ralf W. Schlosser, Maurício Fontana de Vargas, Leigh Anne White, Rajinder Koul, Howard C. Shane

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As artificial intelligence (AI) makes significant headway in various arenas, the field of speech–language pathology is at the precipice of experiencing a transformative shift towards automation. This study introduces QuickPic AAC, an AI-driven application designed to generate topic-specific displays from photographs in a “just-in-time” manner. Using QuickPic AAC, this study aimed to (a) determine which of two AI algorithms (NLG-AAC and GPT-3.5) results in greater specificity of vocabulary (i.e., percentage of vocabulary kept/deleted by clinician relative to vocabulary generated by QuickPic AAC; percentage of vocabulary modified); and to (b) evaluate perceived usability of QuickPic AAC among practicing speech–language pathologists. Results revealed that the GPT-3.5 algorithm consistently resulted in greater specificity of vocabulary and that speech–language pathologists expressed high user satisfaction for the QuickPic AAC application. These results support continued study of the implementation of QuickPic AAC in clinical practice and demonstrate the possibility of utilizing topic-specific displays as just-in-time supports.

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)0.004
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.489
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.505
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207