ArticleAugmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985)2015
Huffman and linear scanning methods with statistical language models.
Article in Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- New and emerging access technologies for adults with complex communication needs and severe motor impairments: State of the science.Augmentative and alternative communication (Baltimore, Md. : 1985) · 2019Review
- Workshops of the Seventh International Brain-Computer Interface Meeting: Not Getting Lost in Translation.Brain computer interfaces (Abingdon, England) · 2019Article
- Brain-Computer Interfaces for Augmentative and Alternative Communication: A Tutorial.American journal of speech-language pathology · 2018Review
- AAC and Artificial Intelligence (AI).Topics in language disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Current scanning access methods for text generation in AAC devices are limited to relatively few options, most notably row/column variations within a matrix. We present Huffman scanning, a new method for applying statistical language models to binary-switch, static-grid typing AAC interfaces, and compare it to other scanning options under a variety of conditions. We present results for 16 adults without disabilities and one 36-year-old man with locked-in syndrome who presents with complex communication needs and uses AAC scanning devices for writing. Huffman scanning with a statistical language model yielded significant typing speedups for the 16 participants without disabilities versus any of the other methods tested, including two row/column scanning methods. A similar pattern of results was found with the individual with locked-in syndrome. Interestingly, faster typing speeds were obtained with Huffman scanning using a more leisurely scan rate than relatively fast individually calibrated scan rates. Overall, the results reported here demonstrate great promise for the usability of Huffman scanning as a faster alternative to row/column scanning.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.