MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413462941 · doi:10.23977/jeis.2025.100205

Augmented Audio Reality: Bridging Mobility Gaps for the Visually Impaired

2025· article· en· W4413462941 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Electronics and Information Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)Visually impairedAugmented realityComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionMultimediaComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The global rise in visual impairment has intensified the need for advanced assistive technologies that promote independent mobility and spatial awareness. Augmented Audio Reality (AAR), an emerging paradigm combining real-time environmental sensing, spatialized audio, and artificial intelligence, presents a compelling solution to overcome the mobility barriers faced by individuals with vision loss. This paper investigates the technological, human-centered, and systemic dimensions of AAR and its potential to redefine assistive navigation. By integrating location-aware audio cues with smart wearable devices, AAR systems offer context-sensitive, non-visual guidance that improves orientation and reduces cognitive strain in both indoor and outdoor environments. Drawing from interdisciplinary literature, comparative analysis, and pilot deployments, the study evaluates AAR's performance relative to conventional tools such as white canes and GPS-based apps. Key considerations include spatial audio design, user adaptability, accessibility, and system integration within smart urban infrastructures. Moreover, the paper addresses ethical concerns around data privacy and equity, emphasizing the need for inclusive design and policy frameworks. The findings demonstrate that AAR can substantially enhance mobility, safety, and autonomy for the visually impaired, marking a significant leap toward inclusive urban living and human-centered technological innovation.

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)0.001
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 score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Electronics and Information ScienceSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207