MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404586651 · doi:10.1145/3699738

EMooly: Supporting Autistic Children in Collaborative Social-Emotional Learning with Caregiver Participation through Interactive AI-infused and AR Activities

2024· article· en· W4404586651 on OpenAlexafffund
Yue Lyu, D Liu, Pengcheng An, Xin Tong, Huan Zhang, Keiko Katsuragawa, Jian Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicAutism Spectrum Disorder Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPsychologySocial emotional learningDevelopmental psychologyAutism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have social-emotional deficits that lead to difficulties in recognizing emotions as well as understanding and responding to social interactions. This study presents EMooly, a tablet game that actively involves caregivers and leverages augmented reality (AR) and generative AI (GenAI) to enhance social-emotional learning for autistic children. Through a year of collaborative effort with five domain experts, we developed EMooly that engages children through personalized social stories, interactive and fun activities, and enhanced caregiver participation, focusing on emotion understanding and facial expression recognition. Compared with a baseline, a controlled study with 24 autistic children and their caregivers showed EMooly significantly improved children's emotion recognition skills and its novel features were preferred and appreciated. EMooly demonstrates the potential of AI and AR in enhancing social-emotional development for autistic children via prompt personalizing and engagement, and highlights the importance of caregiver involvement for optimal learning 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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.746

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.299 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations24
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous TechnologiesSame topicAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFrench-language works237,207