惯性聚合 高效追踪和阅读你感兴趣的博客、新闻、科技资讯
阅读原文 在惯性聚合中打开

推荐订阅源

博客园_首页
B
Blog
V
V2EX
T
Tailwind CSS Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
Hugging Face - Blog
博客园 - 【当耐特】
博客园 - 聂微东
博客园 - 叶小钗
博客园 - 三生石上(FineUI控件)
The Cloudflare Blog
J
Java Code Geeks
H
Help Net Security
雷峰网
雷峰网
Apple Machine Learning Research
Apple Machine Learning Research
H
Hackread – Cybersecurity News, Data Breaches, AI and More
Engineering at Meta
Engineering at Meta
F
Fortinet All Blogs
Martin Fowler
Martin Fowler
D
Docker
L
LangChain Blog
人人都是产品经理
人人都是产品经理
爱范儿
爱范儿
WordPress大学
WordPress大学
V
Visual Studio Blog

cs.HC updates on arXiv.org

Quantitative Movement Testing: Measuring Patient Movements from a Single Smartphone Video Vision-Language Models Suppress Female Representations Under Ambiguous Input The New Social Image: How AI Competency and AI Proactivity Influence Self- and Peer-Perceptions in the Workplace TUX: Measuring Human--AI Tacit Understanding LLUMI: Improving LLM Writing Assistance for Mental Health Support with Online Community Feedback VideoFDB: Evaluating Full-Duplex Vision-Speech Capabilities in Conversational Agents Label Over Logic? How Source Cues Bias Human Fallacy Judgments More Than LLMs Inform, Coach, Relate, Listen: Auditing LLM Caregiving Support Roles How Coding Agents Fail Their Users: A Large-Scale Analysis of Developer-Agent Misalignment in 20,574 Real-World Sessions MetaRanker: Human-in-the-loop Active Ranking for Metalens Image Quality Analyzing Persona Effects in Generated Explanations from Multimodal LLM Agents in Urban Perception First head-to-head comparison of agentic AI applied to the analysis of simulated data of the Einstein Telescope Granuscore: A Reference-Free Measure of Granularity for Text Analysis and Question Answering The Timing Dependencies of Trust: Speed, Accuracy, and cBCI Neuro-Decoupling in Human-AI Teams Bayesian Distributional Models of Executive Functioning Visual Matters: Connecting Aesthetic Appeal and Production Quality of Photos, Infographics and Data Visualizations to Credibility of Social Media Posts Data-driven Head Motion Generation through Natural Gaze-Head Coordination Agreement Metrics for LLM-as-Judge Evaluation: What to Report and Why Perceptually Lossless Tactile Texture Synthesis with Compact Spectral Envelope Models MambaGaze: Bidirectional Mamba with Explicit Missing Data Modeling for Cognitive Load Assessment from Eye-Gaze Tracking Data CogAdapt: Transferring Clinical ECG Foundation Models to Wearable Cognitive Load Assessment via Lead Adaptation Augmented Analytics and Decision Quality: The Role of Trust among Non-Technical BI Users Faster Completion, Less Learning: Generative AI Reduced Study Time on Math Problems and the Knowledge They Build PaintCopilot: Modeling Painting as Autonomous Artistic Continuation Personality Engineering with AI Agents: A New Methodology for Negotiation Research PULSE: Agentic Investigation with Passive Sensing for Proactive Intervention in Cancer Survivorship Access Timing as Scaffolding: A Reinforcement Learning Approach to GenAI in Education Conversations in Space: Structuring Non-Linear LLM Interactions on a Canvas MAPLE: Self-Supervised Learning-Enhanced Nonlinear Dimensionality Reduction for Visual Analysis nASR: An End-to-End Trainable Neural Layer for Channel-Level EEG Artifact Subspace Reconstruction in Real-Time BCI
Vibrotactile versus Visual Stimulation in Learning the Piano
Matteo A. Coscia, Mazen Al Borno · 2024-06-11 · via cs.HC updates on arXiv.org

Vibrotactile stimulation has been explored to accelerate the acquisition of motor skills involving finger movements (Gemicioglu et al. 2022, Markow et al. 2010, Seim et al. 2017). This study evaluates the effectiveness of vibrotactile stimulation compared to visual feedback in learning a 14-note one-handed tune on the piano. In the experiment, 14 subjects with no prior piano experience were exposed to both vibrotactile and visual stimulation to determine which was more effective. Subjects were randomized 1:1 in a group that first receives vibrotactile stimulation, then visual stimulation or in a group that first receives visual stimulation, then vibrotactile stimulation. Effectiveness was measured by evaluating the timing error and accuracy. Results from our study indicated that the timing error for vibrotactile stimulation was 12.1% (SD 6.0%), while the equivalent for visual stimulation was 22.3% (SD 10.3%). The accuracy for vibrotactile stimulation was 69.2% (SD 27.2%), while the equivalent for visual stimulation was 91.3% (SD 13.5%). It was observed that vibrotactile stimulation was generally more effective at minimizing the timing error at which the notes were hit compared to visual stimulation, and no statistically significant differences were found in accuracy (U = 61, p = 0.0930).