MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407555470 · doi:10.2478/vri-2024-0002

Teaching intersection analysis to students with low vision

2023· article· en· W4407555470 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Orientation & Mobility · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSpeech and Audio Processing
Canadian institutionsAssociation for Canadian StudiesUniversité de MontréalSanté MontérégieCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalCentre de réadaptation Lethbridge-Layton-MackayCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationOptech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyApplied psychologyMedical educationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As municipal engineers attempt to reduce pedestrian and vehicular accidents, and promote active mobility, they have incorporated several new elements at intersections that potentially diminish the safety of pedestrians with visual impairments. Orientation and mobility (O&M) specialists must adapt to these new situations and provide instruction that take into account the complexity at these intersections. This novel method allows individuals with low vision to develop a comprehensive risk assessment and analysis that is generalizable to nearly all intersections. This teaching strategy is modified accordingly if the individual is traveling at intersections controlled by stop signs or traffic lights. This strategy has been successfully applied to promote the safety and independence of numerous travellers with visual 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.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.343 · 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