Ambiguous keyboards for AAC

Judge, Simon; Friday, Marcus

doi:10.1108/17549451111190650

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rather than producing a single output for each input, these devices are coded, permitting multiple possible outputs for a limited number of inputs. 71 In comparison to static boards, dynamic screen communication devices provide a larger vocabulary to the user at one time, enabling more natural and responsive communication.…”

Section: Augmentative and Alternative Communication Devicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in Communicative Access Solutions for Children With Cerebral Palsy

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Access solutions may facilitate communication in children with limited functional speech and motor control. This study reviews current trends in access solution development for children with cerebral palsy, with particular emphasis on the access technology that harnesses a control signal from the user (eg, movement or physiological change) and the output device (eg, augmentative and alternative communication system) whose behavior is modulated by the user's control signal. Access technologies have advanced from simple mechanical switches to machine vision (eg, eye-gaze trackers), inertial sensing, and emerging physiological interfaces that require minimal physical effort. Similarly, output devices have evolved from bulky, dedicated hardware with limited configurability, to platform-agnostic, highly personalized mobile applications. Emerging case studies encourage the consideration of access technology for all nonverbal children with cerebral palsy with at least nascent contingency awareness. However, establishing robust evidence of the effectiveness of the aforementioned advances will require more expansive studies.

show abstract

Section: Augmentative and Alternative Communication Devicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trends in Communicative Access Solutions for Children With Cerebral Palsy

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ambiguous keyboard schemes avoid some of these costs by moving on to query the next letter even if the user's input leaves some ambiguity about the current letter [14] (e.g. T9, [15]).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

User-Adaptive Text Entry for Augmentative and Alternative Communication

Higger¹,

Quivira²,

Erdoğmuş³

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The viability of an Augmentative and Alternative Communication device often depends on its ability to adapt to an individual user's unique abilities.Though human input can be noisy, there is often structure to our errors. For example, keyboard keys adjacent to a target may be more likely to be pressed in error. Furthermore, there can be structure in the input message itself (e.g. 'u' is likely to follow 'q'). In a previous work, 'Recursive Bayesian Coding for BCIs' (IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 2016), a query strategy considers these structures to offer an error-adaptive single-character text entry scheme. However, constraining ourselves to single-character entry limits performance. A single user input may be able to resolve more uncertainty than the next character has. In this work, we extend the previous framework to incorporate multicharacter querying similar to word completion. During simulated spelling, our method requires 20% fewer queries compared to single-character querying with no accuracy penalty. Most significantly, we show that this multicharacter querying scheme converges to the information theoretic capacity of the discrete, memoryless user input model.

show abstract

“…Those using text representation will need to select around 27-40 items (unless using an ambiguous keyboard 5 ), whereas those using graphic symbols may need to select from as many as 4000 items. To navigate this number of items the user is required to make a series of selections either as a coded sequence (e.g.…”

Section: What Is the Potential For Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the potential for context aware communication aids?

Judge

Hawley

Cunningham

et al. 2015

Journal of Medical Engineering & Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use of voice output communication aids (VOCAs) can be a very effective strategy to assist people with speech impairments in communicating. Despite this, people who use communication aids often express frustration with VOCAs -desiring devices that are simpler, quicker and more effective to use.Whilst it is not possible to resolve all these issues with technology, we argue that significant progress can be made. The use of contextual information is one development that could improve the simplicity and effectiveness of communication aid design. Individuals using a VOCA also face constraints related to the selection of these items.Those using text representation will need to select around 27-40 items (unless using an ambiguous keyboard 5 ), whereas those using graphic symbols may need to select from as many as 4000 items. To navigate this number of items the user is required to make a series of selections Individuals use a range of strategies to select items on a VOCA -some may be able to press directly onto a screen or keyboard (known as direct access), whereas others may have difficulties with co-ordination or control and require alternative access devices. These devices can include alternative keyboards (for example those with key 'guards'), alternative mice (for example, eye gaze or head movement selection), or other controls such as switches. Switches are binary (non-latched) 'buttons' that come in a range of types -with varying size, shape, activation force or method. When using a switch, the user will either press it to select the desired item from a list of items through which the computer is scrolling, or use multiple switches to manually 'move' through the possible selections and then select the desired item 7 .There are few studies measuring actual input or output (speaking) rates of VOCA users, however for text production an output (measured in words per minute -wpm) of less than 5 wpm for switch access 8 , or less than or around 10 wpm for AAC users using any mode 9,10 has been suggested. This can be compared to studies of typing on 'soft' keyboards that suggest rates of between 8-20wpm 11 . As the speaking rate of a typical speaker during conversation may be between 100 and 200 wpm 12,13 it can be seen that current AAC output is in the region of an order of magnitude slower than spoken speech.People who use AAC and VOCAs often cite challenges and frustrations related to the speed of communication using these systems and also in their simplicity of use 14,15 . This has been a focus of prior work carried out as part of the NIHR Devices for Dignity (D4D) Healthcare example, the iOS8 word prediction keyboard claims to take into account " your text messaging style", "who you're writing to", "what the conversation is about" and "how you email" 34 . The Use of Context for Augmentative CommunicationPeople who use AAC may be able to process and use the context of a conversation receptively in the same way as any other individual. However, their operational use of this contextual information is much mo...

show abstract

Ambiguous keyboards for AAC

Cited by 8 publications

References 25 publications

Trends in Communicative Access Solutions for Children With Cerebral Palsy

Trends in Communicative Access Solutions for Children With Cerebral Palsy

User-Adaptive Text Entry for Augmentative and Alternative Communication

What is the potential for context aware communication aids?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About