EIAH et langue des signes Spécifications et Outils pour construire des EIAH adaptés à la langue des signes et aux apprenants sourds

National audienceLe développement d'EIAH et la mise à disposition d'enseignements en lignes sont particulièrement justifiés pour le public sourd dont le déficit en matière formation est largement constaté. Cependant ces dispositifs doivent prendre en compte les particularités de ces apprenants et en premier lieu leur langue naturelle d'apprentissage, la langue des signes. Celle-ci n'ayant pas de forme écrite, le support vidéo peut jouer en grande partie ce rôle à condition de le doter d'un ensemble de fonctionnalités analogues à celles utilisées pour manipuler l'écrit des langues vocales. Cet article décrit les principales démarches utilisées pour rendre les EIAH accessibles ou adaptés aux apprenants sourds et présente quelques outils dotant la vidéo en langue des signes de fonctionnalités de l'écrit

Analyse de vidéos en langue des signes : méthodes et stratégies

National audienceLes langues des signes (LS) sont les formes les plus abouties de communication gestuelle. Leur analyse automatique constitue donc un réel défi qui implique de prendre en compte leur organisation aux niveaux lexical et syntaxique. Cet article présente dans un premier temps les spécificités des langues des signes pour montrer la difficulté d'un traitement automatique de vidéos en LS. Nous montrons comment des contraintes propres aux LS peuvent etre intégrées à un système de suivi des mains et de la tete dans les vidéos pour le rendre plus robuste et comment les résultats du suivi peuvent etre intégrés dans un modèle de plus haut niveau rendant compte de l'organisation spatiale des LS

Towards Sign language recognition system in Human-Computer interactions

This paper presents a modeling approach for Sign language recognition which is introduced through a dialogue between deaf people and signing avatar. By this modeling approach, the system can be configurable as the scenario and the vocabulary can be modified or changed. Tow important elements are included to these modeling: the context and the prediction. The objective is to improve the reliability of sign language recognition system compared to the classic systems which generally do not use semantic concept

Traitement des corpus en Langue des Signes en recherches sociolinguistiques

Les recherches sociolinguistiques sur des sujets sourds mettent en jeu des entretiens et divers documents en langue des signes, enregistrés sur supports vidéo, les langues des signes n’ayant pas d’écriture. Nous expliquons pourquoi il est important de conserver la langue des échanges sans passer par une traduction en français. L’exploitation de ces corpus nécessite des outils informatiques permettant de naviguer dans ces vidéos et d’analyser leur contenu en rendant compte de ce qui est dit et des manières de dire en langue des signes. Nous présentons les premiers outils spécifiques, logiciels d’annotation en langue des signes, logiciels de schématisation d’un signe ou d’un énoncé en langue des signes. Nous montrons les pratiques sociologiques qu’ils permettent mais aussi les nouveaux besoins qu’ils suscitent, pour annoter ces vidéos de manière plus riche, pour accéder à leur contenu à partir de requêtes exprimées directement en langue des signes et pour être capables de traiter des vidéos enregistrées dans les conditions naturelles et non contraintes d’un entretien.The sociolinguistic researches on deaf subjects involve interviews and various documents in sign language. As sign languages don’t have graphical form, those documents are recorded on video media. We explain why studying the interviews directly in sign language, without any translation, is so important. The analysis of these corpora requires computer tools to navigate through these videos and to analyze their content along two points of view : what is said and how this is said in sign language. We present the first specific tools, tools to annotate in sign language, tools to produce a schematic form of a sign or of an utterance. We present the sociological practices they allow, but also new needs they generate, for more complete annotations, for direct access to the content from requests expressed in sign language, and for processing videos which were recorded in natural and unconstrained conditions

Risorse per la produzione di forme scritte di Lingua dei Segni tramite un software centrato sull'utilizzatore (SWift)

ISI CITATION INDEX - WOS 00032392773138 - IDS BGR95International audienceThe SignWriting improved fast transcriber (SWift), presented in this paper, is an advanced editor for computer-aided writing and transcribing of any Sign Language (SL) using SignWriting (SW). The application is an editor which allows composing and saving desired signs using the SW elementary components, called “glyphs”. These make up a sort of alphabet, which does not depend on the national Sign Language and which codes the basic components of any sign. The user is guided through a fully-automated procedure, making the composition process fast and intuitive. SWift pursues the goal of helping to break down the "electronic barriers" that keep deaf people away from the web, and at the same time to support linguistic research about Sign Languages features. For this reason it has been designed with a special attention to deaf user needs, and to general usability issues. The editor has been developed in a modular way, so it can be integrated everywhere the use of SW as an alternative to written “verbal” language may be advisable.Le SignWriting improved fast transcriber (SWift), présenté dans cet article, est un éditeur avancé pour l'écriture et la transcription assistées par ordinateur de toute Langue des Signes (SL) en utilisant SignWriting (SW). L'application est un éditeur qui permet de composer et de sauvegarder les signes souhaités en utilisant les unités constitutives de SW, appelés "glyphes". Ils constituent une sorte d'alphabet, qui ne dépend pas de la Langue des Signes nationale et qui codifie les éléments de base de tout Signe. L'utilisateur est guidé par un procédé entièrement automatisé, ce qui rend le processus de composition rapide et intuitif. SWift poursuit l'objectif d'aider à briser les "barrières électroniques" qui empêchent les personnes sourdes d’accéder à la Toile, et en même temps de soutenir la recherche linguistique sur les caractéristiques des Langues des Signes. Pour cette raison, il a été conçu avec une attention particulière aux besoins des utilisateurs sourds, et à des questions générales de convivialité. L'éditeur a été développé de façon modulaire, de sorte qu'il peut être intégré partout où l'utilisation de SW comme alternative à la langue écrite "verbale" peut être souhaitable.Il "SignWriting improved fast transcriber" (SWift), presentato in questo articolo, è un avanzato editor di scrittura e trascrizione "computer-aided" mediante SignWriting (SW) per qualsiasi Lingua dei Segni (SL). L'applicazione è un editor che permette di comporre e salvare i segni desiderati utilizzando le componenti elementari di SW, chiamate "glifi". Queste costituiscono una sorta di alfabeto, che non dipende dalla Lingua dei Segni nazionale, che codifica gli elementi di base di qualsiasi segno. L'utente è guidato attraverso una procedura completamente automatica, rendendo così il processo di composizione veloce ed intuitivo. SWift persegue l'obiettivo di aiutare ad abbattere le "barriere elettroniche" che tengono le persone sorde lontane dal web, e allo stesso tempo di sostenere la ricerca linguistica sulle caratteristiche delle Lingue dei Segni. Per questo motivo è stato progettato con una particolare attenzione alle esigenze degli utenti sordi, ma anche in una ottica di usabilità generale. L'editor è stato sviluppato in modo modulare, quindi può essere integrato ovunque sia consigliabile l'uso di SW in alternativa alla lingua scritta "verbale"

Pointing gestures in sign language: Variations, interpretations and recognition

Variability appears in communication process over these steps: conception, enunciation, perception and interpretation. This is also true for the sign language. Conception results in the mental space of the speaker, which guides him to perform his speech notably by organizing entities and their relations. Sign language discourses handle illustrative and non-illustrative intent

Prognostic impact of Epstein-Barr virus serostatus in patients with nonmalignant hematological disorders undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: the study of Infectious Diseases Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

BackgroundIn patients with acute leukemia, lymphoma and chronic malignancies, donor and/or recipient Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) seropositive status increases the risk of development of chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) after allo-hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT), while it has no influence on other transplant outcomes. No data are available on the impact of EBV serostatus on transplant outcomes in patients with nonmalignant hematological disorders. ObjectiveWe analyzed the influence of the recipient's (R) and donor's (D) EBV serostatus on transplant outcomes (overall survival (OS); relapse-free survival (RFS); relapse incidence (RI); nonrelapse mortality (NRM); acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD); cGVHD) in patients with nonmalignant hematological disorders undergoing allo-HCT. Patients and MethodsA total of 2,355 allo-HCTs performed between 1997 and 2016 for acquired bone marrow failure or hemoglobinopathies were included in this retrospective Registry megafile Infectious Diseases Working Party of the European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation (IDWP-EBMT) study. ResultsArray ConclusionsAllo-HCT from EBV-seropositive versus EBV-seronegative donors are at 31% higher risk of cGVHD in patients with nonmalignant hematological disorders undergoing allo-HCT; however this difference is nonsignificant in multivariate analysis

Ruxolitinib for Glucocorticoid-Refractory Acute Graft-versus-Host Disease

BACKGROUND: Acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) remains a major limitation of allogeneic stem-cell transplantation; not all patients have a response to standard glucocorticoid treatment. In a phase 2 trial, ruxolitinib, a selective Janus kinase (JAK1 and JAK2) inhibitor, showed potential efficacy in patients with glucocorticoid-refractory acute GVHD. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial comparing the efficacy and safety of oral ruxolitinib (10 mg twice daily) with the investigator's choice of therapy from a list of nine commonly used options (control) in patients 12 years of age or older who had glucocorticoid-refractory acute GVHD after allogeneic stem-cell transplantation. The primary end point was overall response (complete response or partial response) at day 28. The key secondary end point was durable overall response at day 56. RESULTS: A total of 309 patients underwent randomization; 154 patients were assigned to the ruxolitinib group and 155 to the control group. Overall response at day 28 was higher in the ruxolitinib group than in the control group (62% [96 patients] vs. 39% [61]; odds ratio, 2.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65 to 4.22; P<0.001). Durable overall response at day 56 was higher in the ruxolitinib group than in the control group (40% [61 patients] vs. 22% [34]; odds ratio, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.43 to 3.94; P<0.001). The estimated cumulative incidence of loss of response at 6 months was 10% in the ruxolitinib group and 39% in the control group. The median failure-free survival was considerably longer with ruxolitinib than with control (5.0 months vs. 1.0 month; hazard ratio for relapse or progression of hematologic disease, non-relapse-related death, or addition of new systemic therapy for acute GVHD, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.60). The median overall survival was 11.1 months in the ruxolitinib group and 6.5 months in the control group (hazard ratio for death, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.15). The most common adverse events up to day 28 were thrombocytopenia (in 50 of 152 patients [33%] in the ruxolitinib group and 27 of 150 [18%] in the control group), anemia (in 46 [30%] and 42 [28%], respectively), and cytomegalovirus infection (in 39 [26%] and 31 [21%]). CONCLUSIONS: Ruxolitinib therapy led to significant improvements in efficacy outcomes, with a higher incidence of thrombocytopenia, the most frequent toxic effect, than that observed with control therapy