THE CROSS-SENSORY GLOBE: Co-Designing a 3D Audio-Tactile Globe Prototype for Blind and Low- \nVision Users to Learn Geography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This MRP presents a co-operatively and iteratively designed 3D audio-tactile globe that enables blind and low-vision users to perceive geo-spatial information. Blind and low-vision users rely on learning aids such as 2D-tactile graphics, braille maps and 3D models to learn about geography. I employed co-design as an approach to prototype and evaluate four different iterations of a cross-sensory globe that uses 3D detachable continents to provide geo-spatial haptic information in combination with audio labels. Informed by my co-design and evaluation, I discuss cross-sensory educational aids as an alternative to visually-oriented globes. My findings reveal affordances of 3D-tactile models for conveying concrete features of the Earth (such as varying elevations of landforms) and audio labels for conveying abstract categories about the Earth (such as continent names). I highlight the advantages of longitudinal participatory design that includes the lived experiences and DIY innovations of blind and low-vision users and makers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".