MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161968693 · doi:10.82308/23262

Towards a User Interface for Audio-Haptic Exploration of Internet Graphics by People who are Blind and Partially Sighted

2023· dissertation· en· W7161968693 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sabrina Knappe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpatializationThe InternetUser interfacePartially sightedScreen readerGraphicsInterface (matter)Web accessibilityVisually impaired

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graphical media make up a large part of the Internet content, yet are largely inaccessible to people who are blind or partially sighted. This makes many websites less appealing to these users and is a large gap in current web accessibility. This thesis has three components, all contributing to the development of a system allowing users who are blind and visually impaired to interact with images on the Internet. The first is a survey of blind individuals in Canada about their habits and needs with regards to interacting with images on the Internet, and qualitative analysis of subsequent interviews to better understand their perspectives. The second is preliminary work on overall system design based on initial communication with users, and iterative design enhancements of the user interface of the system. The third is an experiment gauging the efficacy of a system that provides spatialized audio representations of photographs. The wide diversity in user abilities and desires were challenging aspects of system design, and ultimately we found that while audio spatialization is a suitable solution for some users, it will not fulfill the needs of every user

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207