Digital system for user rating content

Abstract

The present invention relates to a digital evaluation system (2), executed by at least one computer device, in which at least one assessment of content (1), preferably in digital audio and / or video format, is performed according to several criteria classified into categories (5), said assessment being carried out through a dedicated interface equipped with a button (6) for each of said criteria; characterized in that it consists, at least during each assessment, of initiating the start of said content (1), during the scrolling, preferably continuous, of said content (1) until it stops, at least at one instant (7), recording in real time a time-stamped tag (8) to which a single one of said criteria is applied by selecting the button (6) corresponding to said single criterion. Figure for the abstract: Fig. 5

Description

Title of the invention: Digital system for evaluating a user on content

[0001] The present invention falls within the field of the evaluation of a user or a participant as to his or her appreciation of content, preferably audio and / or video content.

[0002] The invention will find a preferential application in the field of training and teaching, in particular in a dematerialized and remote manner.

[0003] In a known manner, the evaluation of a user, such as a student, is carried out under the cover of a supervisor, such as a teacher. This supervisor uses evaluation materials, such as exercises, which are submitted to the user for completion. Once completed by the user, the exercises are corrected by the supervisor, in particular by comparing the results obtained by the user with reference results, in order to measure the appreciation of said user and to evaluate his level, in particular with respect to knowledge previously provided and to verify to what extent it has been acquired.

[0004] With the development of new information and communication technologies (NICT), evaluation is increasingly carried out remotely and electronically, through the digitalization of media and transmission via communication networks and dedicated IT platforms. In addition, the use of computer tools ensures at least partly automated correction of the results transmitted by the user, considerably simplifying the supervisor's task and reducing the time allocated to this task. In addition, the IT tools offer interfaces, accessible to both the supervisor and the user, listing the assessment supports which can then be configured according to each content subject to assessment, while maintaining a standard between the supports.

[0005] In this context, the evaluation may aim at the appreciation of a user with respect to specific content in digital audio and / or video format. Usually, such audio and / or video content is recorded digitally in a file with a dedicated format, allowing its reproduction by computer equipment and allowing the temporal scrolling of the content thus reproduced, through a reading operation controlled by the supervisor or the user, until stopping at the end of the scrolling. A pause command also makes it possible to temporarily stop the scrolling. Without limitation, such audio and / or video content may target one or more speakers giving a speech, a discourse or a debate, an interview or a dialogue, a lecture or a plea. It can also be a sequence from a cinematographic work, a television program, a report or a documentary. Furthermore, the topics covered in the content are numerous. Content may, in particular, target the recording of a person acting as an operator on an industrial machine: the assessment may then consist of the user assessing the operator's actions, with a view to verifying whether the user correctly understands the operation of said industrial machine and, in particular, whether he or she can detect an erroneous maneuver by the operator.

[0006] That being said, at present, the assessment of audio and / or video content can be implemented by generating a label or “tag” at a time during the scrolling of the reading of said content. The tag is then timestamped relative to the time scrolling, namely by applying to said tag the temporal data of said time. This tag must be associated with one of several criteria, which it is currently necessary to write (i.e. enter manually via a keyboard or an interface) and / or by operating a graphical interaction with the interface, such as a copy / paste or even a drag / drop from a library comprising several criteria. Due to the time required to apply a tag at a specific time and especially to associate the criterion with said tag, it is necessary to pause the playback of the content scrolling to perform this operation. Once the tag is applied, playback is restarted until the next tag to be applied. It is easy to understand that, without carrying out this pausing process, continuing the scrolling is likely to limit the number of tags to be applied and the criteria to be associated, in particular the precision of the moment and the content of the criterion if it must be written. Another option is to continuously apply tags without associating them with criteria. It is only at the end of the content scrolling that it is then possible to enter the criteria for each tag, in particular by restarting playback at the moment of a tag, then moving on to the next tag, etc. While such an approach remains easy, even if tedious, it does not correspond to a fluid evaluation aimed at a continuous appreciation of the content, whether it is a digital recording or a live presentation. Indeed, the evaluation may focus on the way a user interprets certain aspects of the content, such as a sequence of gestures, a series of sentences, a change in behavior. It is then required to scroll continuously from the beginning to the end of the content, in order to consider a specific evaluation of the user regarding the appreciation of said content.

[0007] The invention aims to overcome the drawbacks of the state of the art by proposing a digital system for evaluating a user or a participant on content, namely with regard to their assessment of the content of said content, preferably audio and / or video content, said system implementing an interface with a button selectable by criterion, making it possible to optimize the application of a time-stamped tag when scrolling through said audio and / or video content. In particular, the invention envisages that the appreciation of the content is carried out continuously, namely that the application of a time-stamped tag can be done in real time during the scrolling of the content, without pause or stop.

[0008] To do this, the evaluation system executed by at least one computer device, comprises at least the step of carrying out at least one assessment of a content according to several criteria classified into categories, said assessment being carried out through a dedicated interface provided with a button for each of said criteria. Advantageously, said evaluation system is characterized in that it consists at least in, during each assessment, - launching the start of said content - while scrolling through said content until it stops, at least at one instant, record in real time a time-stamped tag to which a single one of said criteria is applied by selecting the button corresponding to said single criterion.

[0009] According to additional, non-limiting characteristics, such an evaluation system may consist of - carry out a reference assessment by a supervisor and obtain a reference list successively including each reference time-stamped tag; - carry out at least one additional assessment by a user and obtain an additional list successively including each additional time-stamped tag; - carry out a quantification of said additional assessment by automatic comparison between the additional list and the reference list.

[0010] According to a preferred embodiment, said content may be in digital audio and / or video format, preferably in video format.

[0011] According to one embodiment, during the appreciation, the scrolling of said content can be carried out continuously.

[0012] According to one embodiment, during the comparison, for each tag of the additional list, in a time interval around each tag of the reference list, a verification of the criterion of said tag of the additional list can be carried out with the corresponding criterion of the reference list.

[0013] According to one embodiment, during the verification, between the criteria of the tag of the reference list and the tag of the additional list, a ratio can be applied according to a scale of the categories of said criteria.

[0014] In a preferred configuration, the invention envisages a specific virtual model to be applied to the interface, in order to provide a graphical environment whose ergonomics are capable of ensuring improved visibility of the criteria buttons, to make the selection of each of the criteria intuitive as the content is continuously scrolled. Advantageously, such a virtual model has the shape of a polygon divided into a grid distributing the buttons within said polygon.

[0015] To do this, according to one embodiment, prior to said assessment, a configuration of a virtual model applied to said dedicated interface is carried out; - said virtual model presenting a grid in the form of a regular polygon divided into portions, - said portions being separated from each other by bisectors of the angles of said polygon each of the portions defining at least one button of each of said criteria.

[0016] According to one embodiment, said portions are subdivided into sections by at least one inscribed polygon, of the same shape as said polygon and whose edges are parallel to the edges of said polygon, each of the sections defining a button of each of said criteria.

[0017] According to one embodiment, said virtual model comprises an additional section centered on the polygon and of the same shape as said polygon, said additional section defining a button of one of said criteria.

[0018] According to one embodiment, the regular polygon comprises at least three vertices, preferably six vertices.

[0019] According to one embodiment, during configuration, - a selection of said criteria is made in relation to a library of all the criteria classified into categories; - the grid of said virtual model is sized according to the number of criteria of said choice.

[0020] According to one embodiment, during the reference assessment, - the supervisor can add, delete or modify a timestamped tag from the reference list, in particular introduce a comment to a timestamped tag from the reference list.

[0021] According to one embodiment, during the verification, a rating can be calculated from an average of each ratio.

[0022] According to one embodiment, the supervisor can manually weight said rating.

[0023] According to one embodiment, it is possible to configure by adding, deleting or modifying at least one criterion in a library grouping all the criteria, in particular a label, a name, a location and / or a category of said at least one criterion.

[0024] According to one embodiment, during each assessment, during a subsidiary step, a table of additional criteria is filled in, then during the quantification, each table is compared to obtain at least one additional ratio, used in the calculation of said rating at the time of verification.

[0025] Other characteristics and advantages of the invention will emerge from the detailed description which follows of the non-limiting embodiments of the invention, with reference to the appended figures, in which:

[0026] [Fig.l] schematically represents a simplified view of a virtual model, showing three diamond-shaped grid configurations with different portions and sections;

[0027] [Fig.2] schematically represents a view similar to [Fig.l], showing three pentagon-shaped grid configurations;

[0028] [Fig.3] schematically represents a view similar to [Fig.l], showing three hexagonal-shaped grid configurations;

[0029] [Fig.4] schematically represents a simplified view of a virtual model, showing a hexagonal-shaped grid, to which a scale of categories is applied;

[0030] [Fig.5] schematically represents a view of an example of simplified implementation of the evaluation system according to the invention.

[0031] The present invention aims at the dematerialized evaluation of the appreciation of a content 1. It should already be noted that such content 1 includes elements that are perceptible at least orally, preferably visually and orally. Such content 1 may take the form of an oral presentation or any audio and / or video recording, preferably video.

[0032] Advantageously, the invention relates to a digital evaluation system 2, hereinafter independently referred to as “system 2” or “evaluation system 2”.

[0033] Said system 2 is intended to be digital. Therefore, it is executed by at least one computer device. For the purposes of the present invention, computer equipment is understood in the broad sense, including in particular a fixed or portable computer terminal, such as a computer, a smart cell phone or “smartphone”, or even a tablet.

[0034] Furthermore, such equipment conventionally comprises at least one display means, such as a screen, as well as selection means, such as a physical or virtual keyboard, a mouse or a touch-sensitive feature of said screen.

[0035] In this context, it will be noted that any data recording can be carried out in storage means equipping a terminal separate from or common to said at least one computer device. In the case of a separate terminal, it may be a server accessible via a communication network, remote such as the Internet or even local, ensuring the transmission of data between the different computer devices.

[0036] Furthermore, such a system 2 comprises steps carried out in a real way, in particular by a person interacting with computer equipment, as well as virtual steps, when processing is carried out by calculation of computer equipment: the system 2 is therefore similar to an evaluation method. However, said system 2 involves digital elements, such as an interface, similar to virtual technical means configured and implemented advantageously within the framework of the present invention.

[0037] Further, this system 2 aims at the evaluation of a user 3 as to the appreciation that he has of said content 1.

[0038] Furthermore, advantageously, several successive evaluations can be carried out with several distinct users 3 with the same content 1, or with one or more users with different contents 1. This evaluation is then carried out at least in part under the supervision of an authorized person, hereinafter referred to as “supervisor 4”. In short, this supervisor 4 sets up the information serving as a reference for the evaluation of the user 3. For example, the supervisor 4 can be a teacher or a trainer, while the user 3 can be a pupil or a student, or even several. In addition, several supervisors 4 can intervene for the evaluation of one or more users 3.

[0039] That being said, during the execution of the system 2, at least one assessment of a content 1 is carried out.

[0040] As mentioned previously, said content 1 may be a presentation by a user 3 in front of at least the supervisor 4, namely that it occurs “live”. Preferably, the content 1 is in digital audio and / or video format, more preferably in video format. It is then a digital file which can be rendered by suitable means executed on said at least one computer device. According to one embodiment, the content includes at least one speaker, for example during a speech or a talk, but also during a presentation made by the user 3.

[0041] Furthermore, such a presentation can be carried out live, directly in front of the supervisor 4 who then carries out a simple assessment of the presentation of said user 3, or via a remote and real-time retransmission of said presentation, in particular during a videoconference. According to a specific possibility, the content 1 can be produced by the user 3, in particular by means of digital audio and / or video capture means with which the computer equipment is provided, such as a camera or “webcam”. According to another embodiment, the content comprises several speakers, for example during a televised debate. Such a debate can be broadcast live, but preferably recorded in the form of said digital content 1, to be viewed later.

[0042] Further, the assessment of said content 1 is carried out according to several criteria. Such criteria can be of any type, targeting the content expressed orally, as well as the way of expressing oneself, the physical attitude, the gestures, as well as the quality of the information transmitted, its understanding, the level of technicality, etc. Preferably, the criteria target the content expressed orally, namely the information transmitted by the people, speakers or users, when they speak. The criteria linked to the form are then considered as additional criteria. Such criteria are established in advance, in order to be accessible during the assessment. To do this, at least one criterion is configured by adding, deleting or modifying it in a library containing all the criteria. Preferably, said library comprises a plurality of criteria, in particular at least five criteria, preferably at least ten criteria, more preferably at least twenty criteria, even more preferably at least thirty criteria. Further, the changes may target a label or a name defining said at least one criterion, or a location and / or a category 5 of said criterion. Such a setting is carried out by at least one supervisor 4.

[0043] As such, the criteria are classified into 5 categories. These 5 categories make it possible to apply a weight to each criterion, namely a more or less positive or negative value. For example, from a positive vision to a negative vision, the 5 categories can include the following qualifiers: positive, good, neutral, bad, negative. According to one embodiment, visual characteristics can be applied to the weights of categories 5, in particular in the form of colors, for example ranging from green to red from a positive qualifier to a negative qualifier, passing through intermediate colors, or even more or less dark. Preferably, the 5 categories are distributed along a 50 scale of values, hereinafter referred to as “50 scale”. Such a scale 50 allows to apply a difference of values ​​between the categories 5, depending on their distance between the steps. An example of such a 50 scale is notably visible in [Fig.4], showing five value levels applied to the criteria, in the form of hatched areas more or less close together with different inclinations. In addition, these different hatched areas can correspond to the colors previously mentioned. Therefore, a differential can be applied between a first step and another step, depending on the position of said first step along the scale 50 and the position of said other step: a greater or lesser ratio can be applied depending on this distance, by moving in an increasing or decreasing manner along the scale 50, as well as towards one side and / or the other of said scale 50.

[0044] Further, each assessment is carried out through a dedicated interface, or a part of the interface used to interact with the system 2. Such an interface is visualized through display means of said at least one piece of computer equipment, such as a screen with which each piece of equipment is provided or to which it is connected, thus forming part of the system 2. The interface allows interactions by the user 3 and the supervisor 4, in particular by means of graphic objects, for example contextual menus.

[0045] In this respect, said interface is provided with a button 6 for each of said criteria. In other words, there is a button 6 per criterion with which the user 3 or the supervisor 4 can interact. By interacting with the button 6, it is therefore possible to select the corresponding criterion, displayed by the interface. This interaction can be carried out in a clickable manner by a dedicated means, such as a mouse cursor or a touch screen. Additionally, the interface can provide descriptive information about each criteria when hovering the cursor over the corresponding button 6.

[0046] Advantageously, the system 2 consists at least in, during each assessment, first launching the start of said content 1. If the content is a presentation by a user 3, then the start of the start corresponds to the beginning of the speech of said user 3. In the case of a recording in audio and / or video format, it is the interaction with an object of the interface which triggers the reading of the corresponding digital file. In either case, a timer of a few seconds, for example 3 to 10 seconds, can advantageously be triggered so that user 3 or supervisor 4 prepares for the assessment. Additionally, at the start of scrolling, whether it is content 1 in digital format or in the form of a live presentation, a timer can be activated, manually or automatically after the timer ends, and then scroll to the end of the content 1, stopped automatically when playing a digital format or manually during a presentation.

[0047] Then, during the scrolling of said content until stopping, at least at a time 7, a time-stamped tag 8 is recorded in real time to which a single one of said criteria is applied by selecting the button 6 corresponding to said single criterion. In short, during his assessment, the user 3 or the supervisor 4 selects a criterion at a time of the scrolling of the content 1, by clicking on the corresponding button 6, depending on what he understands and interprets at that time. The interface then makes it possible to generate a tag 8 with the time data It should be noted that a tag can be a marker or a “digital label”, notably in the form of metadata, including temporal data relating to said digital file, as well as data relating to the criteria, for example its name, its label or even its category 5.

[0048] Thus, during the assessment, at each moment, the user 3 or the supervisor 4 only has to click on the button 6 corresponding to his choice in relation to the interpretation he has of the content 1 which is broadcast before his eyes. Furthermore, by repeating the operation several times while scrolling through the content 1, several tags are successively listed, with a time and the criterion selected at the time of selection of each of said several tags. In short, the person no longer has to worry about manually entering what he understands at a time while scrolling through the content 1, but clicks on the button 6 of the criterion which best corresponds to his interpretation at that time: the person can then remain focused on what is subsequently broadcast in the content, with a view to selecting a criterion again at a later time. The invention therefore makes it possible to automatically select, on the fly, one criterion among others, depending on what is presented to the user 3 or the supervisor 4, with a precise temporal indication of the time of interpretation by this person.

[0049] Advantageously, the assessment is carried out in real time during the scrolling, namely that said scrolling of the content is carried out continuously. In short, the scrolling takes place preferably without the possibility of stopping from the beginning to the end of the content 1, especially in the case of an oral presentation which takes place without interruption, or like a retransmission of a live intervention. The assessment is therefore free from any stop between the beginning and the end of the scrolling of the content 1. The scrolling then takes place in a single go.

[0050] It will be noted that the assessment step can be carried out in a similar manner once or several times in a row, in particular by the supervisor then the user 3, or vice versa. This similarity corresponds to the use of the same interface to select the criteria to be applied to the content 1.

[0051] Subsequently, an assessment step carried out by the supervisor 4 will be called “reference assessment”, while the assessment carried out by a user 3 will be called “additional assessment”.

[0052] According to one embodiment, during a presentation by a speaker, a user 3 or during a production of content 1 by said speaker or user 3, the supervisor 4 carries out a single reference assessment.

[0053] According to another embodiment, the invention provides that the user 3 and the supervisor 4 use the same interface for their respective assessment of a given content of a speaker and / or a user 3. Therefore, the assessment of the supervisor 4 will serve as a reference for evaluating the assessment of the user 3. To do this, the evaluation system 2 consists of carrying out a reference assessment by the supervisor 4 and obtaining a reference list 9 successively including each time-stamped reference tag 8. It should be noted that it is possible for the supervisor to add, delete or modify a time-stamped tag 8 from the reference list 9. This interaction can be carried out once the reference assessment is complete, by acting via the interface on said reference list 9. In addition, the supervisor 4 can introduce a comment to a time-stamped tag 8 from the reference list 9, in particular by mentioning a particularity of its interpretation at the corresponding time. Before or preferably after the reference assessment, a user 3 makes at least one additional assessment and obtains an additional list 10 successively including each additional time-stamped tag 8. Then, once the two reference and additional assessments have been carried out, a quantification 11 of said additional assessment is carried out by automatic comparison between the additional list 10 and the reference list 9. This comparison makes it possible to detect the tags 8 and the common or different criteria between the lists 9, 10, in order to verify the concordance between the reference and additional assessments carried out by the user 3 and the supervisor 4.

[0054] In particular, according to one embodiment, during the comparison, for each tag 8 of the additional list 10, in a time interval 90 around each tag 8 of the reference list 9, a verification of the criterion of said tag 8 of the additional list 10 is carried out with the corresponding criterion of the reference list 9. In short, it is verified that the user 3 has selected a criterion within a time period around the instant 7 of the tag corresponding to the selection of a criterion by the supervisor 4. This time period may be between plus or minus one to ten seconds after and before said instant 7, preferably approximately five seconds, more preferably approximately three seconds. If the timestamp of the tag 8 of the additional list 10 is located within the time period, then the criteria are compared between the corresponding tags 8 of the lists 9, 10. Conversely, no tag 8 in the additional list 10 includes a timestamp that matches, then user 3 has not detected an important criterion and this omission is taken into account during quantification 11, for example by a zero or negative value.

[0055] Then, if the user 3 has correctly timestamped an important aspect in the time range corresponding to the timestamp of the supervisor 4, then the verification can comprise a step of verifying the criterion selected by each of them. To do this, according to one embodiment, during the verification, between the criteria of the tag of the reference list 9 and the tag of the additional list 10, a ratio is applied according to said scale 50 of the categories 5 of said criteria. Thus, it is possible to apply a differential corresponding to the proximity of the categories 5, for example a reduction of a percentage depending on the number of levels between the criteria, in particular from 5% to 50% between each level, preferably 20% or 25% between each level.

[0056] Such a quantification step 11 by comparison is notably highlighted in the example of [Fig.5].

[0057] Following this quantification 11, it is possible to obtain ratios between the performance of user 3 and that of the reference supervisor 4, so that said user 3 can take note, tag 8 by tag 8, to confirm the differences between the assessments, or even his potential errors, but also read any comments written by the supervisor 4 for the corresponding tags of the reference list 9. According to one embodiment, during the verification, a rating 12 is calculated, from an average of each ratio. In short, the system 2 makes it possible to carry out a quantification 11 then an automatic calculation from the quantification, to obtain a rating 12 on the performance of user 3 compared to that of the supervisor 4. From this rating 12, according to one embodiment, the supervisor 4 or a third party can manually weight said rating 12. In short, depending on the results, the supervisor 4 or a third party can increase or decrease the rating 12, in particular in relation to other prior evaluations of the same user 3 or a notable change in his performance.

[0058] According to a complementary embodiment, during each assessment, during a subsidiary step, a table of additional criteria is filled in, then during the quantification 11, each table is compared to obtain at least one additional ratio, used in the calculation of said rating 12 at the time of verification. In addition, additional criteria may relate to related aspects of Content 1, such as physical attitude or behavior, manner of speaking such as elocution, distribution and proper management of speaking time, etc. The additional criteria therefore focus more on the form of content 1, rather than the substance. In short, the additional criteria do not focus on what is said, the substance, but rather on the way of saying it, the form, namely of transmitting the oral and / or visual information of said content 1. Furthermore, the additional criteria concern the entire content 1, from start to finish. They can therefore be repeated with selectable criteria during the scrolling of said content 1, such as for example the gestures which can be specific, in particular not adapted to a moment, but satisfactory over the entire sequence.

[0059] Furthermore, the table is part of said interface. Such a table can be a cross-tab form, with rows and columns defining boxes. In addition, in the first column, each box is entered with the said additional criteria, one per row, while, in the first row and from the second column onwards, each box is entered with value estimates, one estimate per column. User 3 or supervisor 4 can then choose a box to apply a single value estimate per additional criterion. Therefore, the form is exclusive, allowing only one box to be selected per row, i.e. only one estimate per additional criterion. The opposite is also possible, distributing the additional criteria by column and the estimates by row. For example, the value estimates can be, from a negative value to a positive value: very insufficient, insufficient, neutral, satisfactory, very satisfactory.

[0060] Thus, during the evaluation carried out by the system 2, the supervisor 4 or a third party can fill in a reference table at the end of the reference assessment. Similarly, the user 3 can fill in an additional table at the end of his additional assessment. The reference tables and the additional table are then compared, to obtain several ratios or an average ratio, which will be integrated at the time of quantification 11. In addition, an additional scale can be applied to the differences between the values ​​of the estimates in the two tables, in order to apply penalties, similarly to scale 50.

[0061] Advantageously, according to one embodiment, before said assessment, namely before carrying out any reference or additional assessment, but especially before the reference assessment if it takes place first, the supervisor 4 defines the possible criteria, in particular as a function of the content 1. Thus, prior to said assessment, a configuration of a virtual model 13 applied to said dedicated interface is carried out. This virtual model 13 is particularly suitable for the implementation of the steps of system 2, in particular at each assessment, offering optimized ergonomics improving the readability of the criteria, with a view to allowing their selection in real time when scrolling through the content 1. In particular, in the case of a denomination applied to each criterion, this ergonomics is based on the orientation of the words and letters, preferably horizontally or diagonally, as well as rectilinear alignment, depending in particular on the reading direction of the language in which the words corresponding to the criteria are written, to facilitate reading and understanding, in particular for words written in the Latin alphabet, for example in French, English or German. Another orientation, in particular vertical, may be considered, depending on the alphabet, for example Cyrillic or Arabic, or for an Asian language, again to make reading and understanding easier in the language concerned. For this purpose, such a virtual model 13 has a grid 14 in the shape of a regular polygon. According to one embodiment, said regular polygon comprises at least three vertices, then resembling an equilateral triangle. According to the embodiments visible in [Fig.l], the polygon comprises four vertices, resembling a rhombus 15. According to the embodiments visible in [Fig.2], the polygon comprises five vertices, forming a regular pentagon 16. In addition, an edge located lower is oriented horizontally. Preferably, according to the embodiments visible in [Fig.3], the polygon comprises six vertices, in the form of a regular hexagon 17. In addition, an edge located lower down is oriented horizontally. Other polygons with seven or more vertices can be considered.

[0062] Further, said regular polygon is divided into portions 18, said portions 18 being separated from each other by bisectors 180 of the angles of said polygon. Thus, each of the portions 18 defines at least one button 6 of each of said criteria. Furthermore, each button 6 has the same dimensions. Therefore, for the diamond 15, we obtain four buttons 6 for four different criteria, as visible in the first representation of [Fig.l]. For the pentagon, we obtain five buttons 6, etc.

[0063] According to one embodiment, said portions 18 are subdivided into sections 19 by at least one inscribed polygon, of the same shape as said polygon and whose edges are parallel to the edges of said polygon. In short, the portions 18 are cut transversely, parallel to the edges of the polygon, to form the sections 19. From then on, each of the sections 19 defines a button 6 of each of said criteria. In short, for each portion 18, it is subdivided into sections, which will delimit the buttons 6; the portion 18 then integrating these buttons 6 of section 19. Such subdivisions of the portions 18 into sections 19 is notably visible in the central representations of figures 1 to 3. According to one embodiment, said virtual model 13 comprises an additional section 20 centered on the polygon and of the same shape as said polygon. Such an additional section 20 then defines a button of one of said criteria. Such a configuration is notably visible in the last representations of figures 1 to 3, combined with the portions 18 divided into sections 19. Thus, we obtain a model 13 whose grid 14 divides the polygon into a variable number of buttons 6 corresponding to the criteria, depending on the shape of the polygon and its divisions.

[0064] In this respect, according to one embodiment, during configuration, a choice of said criteria is made with respect to a library of all the criteria classified into categories 5. Such a choice can be made by the supervisor 4 with respect to an ordered list, which can be classified, in particular alphabetically, by category 5 or other, in order to facilitate the search and the choice of criteria by the supervisor 4. According to one possibility, this choice can be made by a step of dragging and dropping a tool from the library to the grid 14 of the model 13, allowing in particular the criterion to be positioned at a precise location. Alternatively, the choice is made by simple validation of the criterion in the library, its positioning in grid 14 being carried out automatically, at a determined location, in particular in relation to the label or the name of the said chosen criterion, or in relation to its category 5. Indeed, a possibility of positioning the criteria can be carried out according to an arrangement of proximity of the closest categories 5 according to the scale 50. In short, the criteria of the same category 5 are positioned adjacently, then next to them the criteria of another close category 5, and so on. Thus, the grid 14 includes in a diametrically opposed manner the criteria of the most distant categories according to the scale 50. In addition, this specific arrangement allows, in the case of categories highlighted by colors, to obtain a colored distribution according to a chromatic disk. Alternatively, it is possible to arbitrarily position each of the selected criteria.

[0065] Then, the grid 14 of said model 13 is sized according to the number of criteria of said choice. In addition, as mentioned previously, during this configuration step, it is possible to intervene on the database by making a change to add, delete or modify a criterion. Thus, it is possible once the visible grid 14 is completed, to choose an additional criterion and add it, which automatically increases the size of the polygon and thus of the grid 14 delimiting the buttons 6. Such a possibility of increasing the grid 14 is notably visible in dotted lines in [Fig. 4]. Similarly, the size of the grid 14 can be automatically reduced when deleting one or more criteria already introduced in said grid 14, to adjust the dimensions to the number of criteria present in said grid 14. According to preferred configurations, the grid 14 of a hexagon may comprise thirteen to thirty-one buttons 6. In other configurations, the grid 14 of a hexagon can include from six to sixty-one buttons 6. It should be noted that grid 14 may then be complete or not, namely that all sections 19 are filled by a chosen criterion, or that some remain empty. Therefore, empty sections 19 are inactive. Preferably, system 2 may provide for only authorizing the saving of a model 13 when its grid 14 is completely filled. Therefore, according to preferred configurations, the grid 14 of a hexagon can comprise thirteen, nineteen, twenty-five, thirty-one or thirty-seven buttons 6.

[0066] Furthermore, during the configuration step, it is also possible to configure the table of the subsidiary assessment, by choosing the additional criteria to be introduced therein, as well as by choosing the value estimates. Such configuration of the table is carried out by the supervisor 4. Additionally, adding or removing an additional criterion automatically sizes the said table, updating the related form.

[0067] Relatedly, as mentioned previously, within the framework of the present invention, all the previously detailed data, such as the lists 9, 10, can be transmitted between the user 3 and the supervisor 4, in order to carry out the steps required by the embodiments of the evaluation system 2.

[0068] Thus, the invention offers a simple and quick evaluation system 2 to use, both by the user 3 and by the supervisor 3, who interact with the same, identical graphical interface. The specific polygon shape of the interface ensures visibility adapted to the criteria in intelligently distributed buttons 6, for intuitive use.

[0069] In addition, the system 2 is dedicated to an appreciation of a content 1 carried out continuously, without possible interruption, ensuring a synchronous selection. The invention is particularly suitable for the appreciation of content 1 in digital audio and / or video format.

Claims

Claims

1. Digital system (2) for evaluating a user (3) by a supervisor (4), executed by at least one computer device, in which - at least one assessment of a content (1) is carried out, in digital audio and / or video format, preferably in video format, according to several criteria classified into categories (5), said assessment being carried out through a dedicated interface provided with a button (6) for each of said criteria;characterized in that it consists at least in, during each assessment, - launching the start of said content (1), - during the scrolling of said content (1) operated continuously until stopping without the possibility of stopping from the beginning to the end of the content (1), at least at one time (7), recording in real time a time-stamped tag (8) to which a single one of said criteria is applied by selecting the button (6) corresponding to said single criterion, the user (3) or the supervisor (4) selecting a criterion at a time of the scrolling of the content (1), by clicking on the corresponding button (6); and in that it consists in - carrying out a reference assessment by the supervisor (4) and obtaining a reference list (9) successively repeating each reference time-stamped tag (8); - carrying out at least one additional assessment by the user (3) and obtaining an additional list (10) successively repeating each additional time-stamped tag (8);- carry out a quantification (11) of said additional assessment by automatic comparison between the additional list (10) and the reference list (9);

2. Evaluation system (2) according to the preceding claim, characterized in that, during the comparison, - for each tag (1) of the additional list, in a time interval (90) around each tag (8) of the reference list (9), a verification of the criterion of said tag (8) of the additional list (10) is carried out with the corresponding criterion of the reference list (9).

3. Evaluation system (2) according to the preceding claim, characterized in that, during the verification, - between the criteria of the tag (8) of the reference list (9) and of the tag (8) of the additional list (10), a ratio is applied according to a scale (50) of the categories (5) of said criteria.

4. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that - prior to said assessment, a configuration of a virtual model (13) applied to said dedicated interface is carried out; - said virtual model (13) having a grid (14) in the form of a regular polygon divided into portions (18), - said portions (18) being separated from each other by bisectors (180) of the angles of said polygon, each of the portions (18) defining at least one button (6) of each of said criteria.

5. Evaluation system (2) according to the preceding claim, characterized in that - said portions (18) are subdivided into sections (19) by at least one inscribed polygon, of the same shape as said polygon and whose edges are parallel to the edges of said polygon, each of the sections (19) defining a button (6) of each of said criteria.

6. Evaluation system (2) according to one of claims 4 or 5, characterized in that - said virtual model (13) comprises an additional section (20) centered on the polygon and of the same shape as said polygon, said additional section (20) defining a button (6) of one of said criteria.

7. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of claims 4 to 6, characterized in that - the regular polygon comprises at least three vertices, preferably six vertices.

8. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of claims 4 to 7, characterized in that, during configuration - a choice of said criteria is made with respect to a library of all the criteria classified into categories (5°; - the grid (14) of said virtual model (13) is sized according to the number of criteria of said choice.

9. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that, during the reference assessment, - the supervisor (4) adds, deletes or modifies a time-stamped tag (8) from the reference list (9), in particular introduces a comment to a time-stamped tag (8) from the reference list (9).

10. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of claims 3 to 9, characterized in that, during the verification, - a rating (12) is calculated, from an average of each ratio.

11. Evaluation system (2) according to the preceding claim, characterized in that - the supervisor manually weights said rating (12).

12. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that - at least one criterion is parameterized by addition, deletion or modification in a library grouping all the criteria, in particular a label, a name, a location and / or a category of said at least one criterion.

13. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that, during each assessment, - during a subsidiary step, a table of additional criteria is filled in, then during the quantification (11), each table is compared to obtain at least one additional ratio, used in the calculation of said rating (12) at the time of verification.

Images