You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Describe the solution you'd like
It would be interesting to develop some scripts to compute the best layout, taking into account a corpus of text and few metrics.
This paper shows that trigrams ordered layout can be up to 15% faster than unigram based layouts.
It also proposes some measures of efficiency, however it seems these measures do not have much correlation with actual wpm.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
however it seems these measures do not have much correlation with actual wpm.
wpm is like the least important metric anyway (so long as it's not going down) - over a lifetime of typing, or even just a few years if you type a lot as my horribly damaged thumbs and relevant hand parts discovered, the metric that really matters is, in decreasing order: strain (how far from resting state are you reaching, with how much muscle activation and tension), distance you gotta cover, and maybe total motion.
Describe the solution you'd like
It would be interesting to develop some scripts to compute the best layout, taking into account a corpus of text and few metrics.
This paper shows that trigrams ordered layout can be up to 15% faster than unigram based layouts.
It also proposes some measures of efficiency, however it seems these measures do not have much correlation with actual wpm.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: