As part of an innovative e-education project, a digital workbook is being developed to help teach handwriting at school for children aged three to seven. The main objective of this project is to offer an advanced digital writing experience at school by using pen-based tablets. In this paper, an automatic qualitative analysis process of cursive handwriting words is presented. This approach is original because the goal is not to recognise the word that was handwritten by children (it is an explicit instruction) but to design a precise evaluation of the quality of his handwriting production to give them a real-time feedback. The presented method is based on a specific explicit elastic letter spotting segmentation able to deal with the imprecision of the handwriting of young children. This approach is suited to automatically and precisely highlight the difficulties encountered by children (adding or missing letters, incorrect shapes...). The validation of the proposed approach has been done on a dataset collected in French preschools and primary schools from 231 children. Beyond quantitative results, this paper reports the very positive impact of using this digital workbook that allows children to work independently with online and real-time feedbacks.2

International audienceThe present study compares the near-field and far-field sensitivities of localized surface plasmon resonance (LSPR) sensors. To put into evidence the difference between far-field and near-field sensors, optical extinction measurements have been performed on gold nanoparticle gratings coated with dielectric superstrates of varying thicknesses. The potential of LSPR sensors is usually considered to lie in the near-field regime. Therefore, a comparison of the near-field sensitivities for gold nanoparticle gratings and continuous gold films of 50 nm in thickness is provided. The difference in refractive index sensitivities of both sensors is discussed in relation with the decay length of the evanescent near-field. SPRs sensors are usually considered more sensitive than LSPRs in terms of the m factor, refractive index sensitivity. We argue that the m factor sensitivity can only be defined for thick (15--100 nm) superstrates; for thin superstrates (d < 15 nm), the decay length of the evanescent field must be taken into account to properly compare both sensors