MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7018278170

Design and Evaluation of a Vocalization Activated Assistive Technology for a Child with Dysarthric Cpeech

2013· dissertation· en· W7018278170 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicAssistive Technology in Communication and Mobility
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodHyporeflexiaDiafiltrationTSG101ProteogenomicsDysgeusiaFusible alloy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Communication disorders affect one in ten Canadians and the incidence is particularly high among those with Cerebral Palsy. A vocalization-activated switch is often explored as an alternative means to communication. However, most commercial speech recognition tools to date have limited capability to accommodate dysarthric speech and thus are often prematurely abandoned. We developed and evaluated a novel vocalization-based access technology as a writing tool for a pediatric participant with cerebral palsy. It consists of a high quality condenser headmic, a custom classifier based on Gaussian Mixture Modeling (GMM) and Mel-frequency Cepstral Coefficients (MFCC) as features. The system was designed to discriminate among five vowel sounds while interfaced to an on-screen keyboard. We used response efficiency theory to assess this technology in terms of goal attainment and satisfaction. The participant’s primary goal to reduce switch activation time was achieved with increased satisfaction and lower physical effort when compared to her previous pathway.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicAssistive Technology in Communication and MobilityFrench-language works237,207