2010
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-14100-3_61
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Spoken Mathematics Using Prosody, Earcons and Spearcons

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

2
15
0
1

Year Published

2014
2014
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
2
15
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Discussions with stakeholders, and, as noted previously, our previous work (see Frankel et al, , and Frankel & Brownstein, ), and information in the literature (see, e.g., Bates & Fitzpatrick, ; Ferreira & Freitas, ) strongly confirmed our belief in the importance of interactive navigation for math expressions; accordingly, building that functionality was an important part of this project. This section briefly describes the navigation tools developed, all of which are controlled via keystrokes.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 84%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Discussions with stakeholders, and, as noted previously, our previous work (see Frankel et al, , and Frankel & Brownstein, ), and information in the literature (see, e.g., Bates & Fitzpatrick, ; Ferreira & Freitas, ) strongly confirmed our belief in the importance of interactive navigation for math expressions; accordingly, building that functionality was an important part of this project. This section briefly describes the navigation tools developed, all of which are controlled via keystrokes.…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…In the second report, we described our findings that while the prosodic enhancements studied did not appear to improve comprehension of the math expressions studied, certain lexical cues did appear to have some value and that further study into the usefulness of prosodic enhancements might be fruitful. Not surprisingly-and consistent with findings by previous researchers (see, e.g., Bates &Fitzpatrick, 2010, andFerreira &Freitas, 2005)-both studies suggested that interactive navigation would be an important enhancement to students' ability to understand spoken mathematical expressions, particularly expressions that are long and/or complex. In anticipation of such a finding, we had already planned to incorporate interactive navigation into the speech system we were developing.…”
supporting
confidence: 89%
“…Bates and Fitzpatrick () described the advantages and disadvantages of lexical and prosodic cues, spatialization (particularly left‐right localization of start‐ and end‐sounds for fractions and other structures), and nonspeech sounds. They proposed a model that combines these cues with spearcons (sped‐up TTS) with the aim of achieving improved comprehension while minimizing the cognitive “overhead” required to process the various types of auditory information.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To illustrate the other cases we first consider the following rule that is applicable if we have a msup node whose second child, i.e., the superscript is equal to 2: self::mathml:msup; ./* [2][text()=2] −→[n] ./*[1]; [t] "square" The rule's action specifies that first the content of the first child node is spoken by applying the engine's procedure re cursively (line 13), followed by speaking the string "square". We can observe that the rule is indeed applicable to the msup node in Fig.…”
Section: Describing Math Via Speech Rulesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, the work on mathematical screen reading has explored adaptive techniques to customize output with re spect to mathematical domains and personal preferences [15,1], the use of prosody and pausing to convey meaning [15,2] as well as to enable better understanding via multi-modal presentation of equations [9]. But generally these efforts have been restricted to specialist systems [15,18,5,21], which either are not web-ready solutions or are restricted to single markup formats and offer limited customizability, which has to be done by users rather than by the providers of web content.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%