FR3119470A1 - Numerical system for evaluating a user on a content - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to a digital evaluation system (2), executed by at least one piece of computer equipment, in which at least one evaluation of a content (1) is carried out, preferably in digital audio and/or 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, initiating the start of said content (1), during the scrolling, preferably continuously, of said content (1) until stopping, at least at a moment (7), record 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 abstract: Fig. 5

Description

Numerical system for evaluating a user on a content

The present invention falls within the field of the evaluation of a user or a speaker as to his appreciation relating to a content, preferably an audio and/or video content.

The invention will find a preferential application in the field of training and education, in particular in a dematerialized and remote manner.

In a known manner, the evaluation of a user, such as a pupil, is carried out under the guise of a supervisor, such as a teacher. This supervisor uses evaluation materials, such as exercises, which are submitted to the user with a view to carrying them out. Once performed 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 assess his level, in particular in relation to previously imparted knowledge and verify to what extent they have been acquired.

With the evolution of new information and communication technologies (NTIC), the evaluation is increasingly carried out remotely and in a dematerialized way, through a digitization of the supports and a transmission through networks. communications 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 allotted to this task.
In addition, the computer tools offer interfaces, accessible to the supervisor as well as to the user, listing the assessment materials that can then be configured according to each content object of the assessment, while maintaining a standard between media.

In this context, the evaluation can aim at the appreciation of a user vis-à-vis 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 it to be restored by computer equipment and allowing the temporal scrolling of the content thus restored, through a read operation. controlled by the supervisor or the user, until stopping at the end of the scrolling. A pause command also temporarily stops scrolling.
Without limitation, such audio and/or video content may target one or more speakers making a speech, a speech or a debate, an interview or a dialogue, a conference or a pleading. It can also be a sequence of a cinematographic work, a television program, a report or a documentary.
Also, the topics covered in the content are numerous. A content may in particular aim at the recording of a participant acting as an operator at the level of an industrial machine: the evaluation may then consist of the user's assessment of the operator's gestures, with a view to check whether the user correctly knows the operation of said industrial machine and whether he knows in particular how to detect an erroneous maneuver by the operator.

This being the case, at the present time, the appreciation of an 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 with respect to time scrolling, namely by applying to said tag the time data of said instant.
To this tag must be associated one criterion among several, which it is currently necessary to write (i.e. to fill in manually via a keyboard or an interface) and/or by operating a graphic interaction with the interface , such as a copy/paste or 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 reading of the scrolling of the content to perform this operation. Once the tag has been applied, playback is restarted until the next tag to be applied. It is easy to understand that, without performing this pausing process, continuing to scroll is likely to limit the number of tags to apply and the criteria to be associated, in particular the precision of the moment and the content of the criterion if necessary. write it.
Another possibility is to continuously apply tags without associating any criteria to them. It is only at the end of the scrolling of the content that it is then possible to fill in the criterion of each tag, in particular by restarting the reading at the moment of a tag, then by passing to the next tag, etc.
If such a process 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 can relate to the way for a user to interpret certain aspects of the content, such as for example a sequence of gestures, a series of sentences, a change in behavior. Continuous scrolling from the beginning to the end of the content is then required, in order to consider a specific evaluation of the user as to the appreciation of said content.

The aim of the invention is to overcome the drawbacks of the state of the art by proposing a digital system for evaluating a user or a participant on a content, namely as regards his appreciation of the content of said content, preferably an 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 timestamped tag when scrolling 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 timestamped tag can be done in real time during the scrolling of the content, without pause or stop.

To do this, the evaluation system executed by at least one piece of computer equipment, comprises at least the step of carrying out at least one evaluation of a content according to several criteria classified into categories, said evaluation 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 evaluation,
- launch the start of said content
- During the scrolling of said content until it stops, at least for a moment, recording in real time a timestamped tag to which a single one of said criteria is applied by selecting the button corresponding to said single criterion.

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 containing each time-stamped reference tag;
- performing at least one additional assessment by a user and obtaining an additional list successively containing each additional timestamped tag;
- perform a quantification of said additional assessment by automatic comparison between the additional list and the reference list.

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

According to one embodiment, during the assessment, the scrolling of said content can be operated continuously.

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, it is possible to perform a verification of the criterion of said tag of the additional list with the corresponding criterion from the reference list.

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

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 is able to ensure improved visibility of the criteria buttons, to make the selection of each of the criteria as the content scrolls continuously. Advantageously, such a virtual model has the shape of a polygon divided into a grid distributing the buttons within said polygon.

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 having a grid in the form of a regular polygon divided into portions,
- said portions being separated from each other by angle bisectors of said polygon
each of the portions defining at least one button of each of said criteria.

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 for each of said criteria.

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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, involved in the calculation of said rating at the time of verification.

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

schematically represents a simplified view of a virtual model, showing three diamond-shaped grid configurations with different portions and sections;

schematically represents a view similar to the , showing three pentagon-shaped grid configurations;

schematically represents a view similar to the , showing three hexagon-shaped grid configurations;

schematically represents a simplified view of a virtual model, showing a grid in the shape of a hexagon, to which a scale of categories is applied;

schematically represents a view of an example of a simplified implementation of the evaluation system according to the invention.

The present invention aims at the dematerialized evaluation of the appreciation of a content 1.
Already, it will be noted that such content 1 comprises elements perceptible at least orally, preferably visually and orally. Such content 1 can take the form of an oral presentation or any audio and/or video recording, preferably video.

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

Said system 2 is provided digital. Therefore, it is executed by at least one piece of computer equipment.
Within the meaning 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.

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 tactile characteristic of said screen.

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

In addition, 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, when processing is carried out by calculation of computer equipment: the system 2 is therefore similar to an evaluation process.
However, said system 2 involves digital elements, such as an interface, similar to virtual technical means shaped and implemented advantageously within the scope of the present invention.

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

In addition, advantageously, several successive evaluations can be carried out with several distinct users 3 with the same content 1, or else 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 student or a student, or even several.
In addition, several supervisors 4 can intervene for the evaluation of one or more users 3.

However, during the execution of the system 2, at least one assessment of a content 1 is carried out.

As mentioned previously, said content 1 can 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 restored by appropriate means executed on said at least one piece of computer equipment.
According to one embodiment, the content includes at least one speaker, for example during a speech or a speech, but also during a presentation made by the user 3.

In addition, such a presentation can be performed live, directly in front of the supervisor 4 who then performs a simple assessment of the presentation of said user 3, or else via a remote and real-time retransmission of said presentation. , especially during a videoconference.
According to a specific possibility, the content 1 can be produced by the user 3, in particular via digital means of audio and/or video capture with which the computer equipment is provided, such as a camera or “webcam”.
According to another embodiment, the content includes 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.

Further, the assessment of said content 1 is carried out according to several criteria.
Such criteria can be of any type, targeting both the substance expressed orally, the way of expressing oneself, the physical attitude, the gestures, as well as the quality of the information transmitted, their understanding, the level of technicality, etc. .
Preferably, the criteria target the substance expressed orally, namely the information transmitted by the people, speakers or users, when they speak. The criteria related to the form are then considered as additional criteria.
Such criteria are established beforehand, in order to be accessible during the assessment. To do this, one parameter by adding, deleting or modifying, at least one criterion in a library grouping together 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, more preferably still at least thirty criteria.
Further on, the changes may target a label or a denomination defining said at least one criterion, or even a location and/or a category of said criterion. Such parameterization is carried out by at least one supervisor 4.

As such, the criteria are classified into categories 5. These categories 5 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 towards a negative vision, the categories 5 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 categories 5 are distributed along a scale 50 of values, hereinafter referred to as “scale 50”.
Such a scale 50 makes it possible to apply a difference in values between the categories 5, according to their distance between the rungs.
An example of such a scale 50 is particularly visible on the , showing five levels of values applied to the criteria, in the form of hatched areas more or less close together with different inclinations. In addition, these various hatched areas may correspond to the colors previously mentioned.
Therefore, a differential can be applied between a first rung and another rung, depending on the position of said first rung along the scale 50 and the position of said other rung: a greater or lesser ratio can be applied depending on of this distance, 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.

Further, each assessment is carried out through a dedicated interface, or part of the interface used to interact with the system 2. Such an interface is displayed through display means of said at least one piece of computer equipment, 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 via graphic objects, for example context menus.

As such, 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 button 6, it is therefore possible to select the corresponding criterion, displayed by the interface. This interaction can be performed in a clickable manner by a dedicated means, such as a mouse cursor or a touch screen.
In addition, the interface can provide descriptive information for each criterion, when hovering over the corresponding button 6 cursor.

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 launch of the start corresponds to the beginning of the speaking of said user 3. In the case of a recording in audio and/or video format, this is the interaction with an interface object that triggers the reading of the corresponding digital file.
In either case, a timer (“timer”) of a few seconds, for example from 3 to 10 seconds, can advantageously be triggered so that the user 3 or the supervisor 4 prepares for the assessment.
Additionally, at the start of scrolling, whether of content 1 in digital format or as a live presentation, a timer can be activated, either manually or automatically after the timer has expired, and then scrolled to the end. of the progress of the content 1, stopped automatically during a reading of a digital format or manually during a presentation.

Then, during the scrolling of said content until it stops, at least at a time 7, a timestamped 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 during the scrolling of the content 1, by clicking on the corresponding button 6, depending on what he understands and interprets at this time. The interface then makes it possible to generate a tag 8 with the time data
It will be noted that a tag can be a marker or a "digital label", in particular in the form of metadata, integrating in particular 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.

Thus, during the assessment, at each instant, the user 3 or the supervisor 4 only has to click on the button 6 corresponding to his choice with respect to the interpretation he has of the content 1 which is spread before his eyes.
In addition, by repeating the operation several times during the scrolling of the content 1, several tags are successively listed, with a time and the criterion selected at the instant of selection of each of said several tags. In short, the person no longer has to worry about manually filling in what he understands at a moment when the content 1 scrolls, but clicks on button 6 of the criterion which best corresponds to his interpretation at that moment: the person can then remain focused on what is broadcast next in the content, with a view to reselecting a criterion 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 to the supervisor 4, with a precise time indication of the moment of the interpretation. by this person.

Advantageously, the assessment is carried out in real time during scrolling, namely that said scrolling of the content is carried out continuously. In short, scrolling takes place preferentially 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 else like a retransmission of a live intervention. The appreciation is therefore freed from any stop between the beginning and the end of the scrolling of the content 1. The scrolling then takes place in one go.

It will be noted that the assessment step can be performed similarly 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 apply to content 1.

Subsequently, an assessment step carried out by the supervisor 4 will be referred to as “reference assessment”, while the assessment carried out by a user 3 will be referred to as “additional assessment”.

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 performs a single reference assessment.

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 supervisor's appreciation 4 will serve as a reference to evaluate the appreciation of user 3.
To do this, the evaluation system 2 consists in carrying out a reference evaluation by the supervisor 4 and obtaining a reference list 9 successively containing each reference tag 8 timestamped.
It will be noted that it is possible for the supervisor to add, delete or modify a timestamped tag 8 from the list 9 of reference. This interaction can be achieved once the reference assessment has been completed, by acting via the interface on said reference list 9 . In addition, the supervisor 4 can introduce a comment to a timestamped tag 8 of the reference list 9, in particular by mentioning a feature of its interpretation at the corresponding instant.
Before or preferably after the reference assessment, a user 3 performs at least one additional assessment and obtains an additional list 10 successively resuming 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.

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, the criterion of said tag 8 is checked. of the additional list 10 with the corresponding criterion of the reference list 9. In short, it is checked that the user 3 has selected a criterion within a period around the instant 7 of the tag corresponding to the selection of a criterion by the supervisor 4. This period can 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 within the time limit, then the criteria are compared between the corresponding tags 8 of the lists 9,10. Conversely, no tag 8 of the additional list 10 includes a timestamp which coincides, then the user 3 has not detected an important criterion and this omission is taken into consideration during the quantification 11, for example by a zero or negative value.

Then, if the user 3 has indeed timestamped an important aspect in the time range corresponding to the timestamp of the supervisor 4, then the verification can comprise a step of verification of 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 of 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 according to the number of steps between the criteria, in particular from 5% to 50% between each step, preferably 20% or 25% between each step.

Such a step of quantification 11 by comparison is in particular highlighted on the example of the .

Following this quantification 11, it is possible to obtain ratios between the service of the user 3 and that of the reference of the supervisor 4, so that said user 3 can only read, tag 8 by tag 8, to confirm the differences between the appreciations, even its potential errors, but also to read the possible comments written by the supervisor 4 for the corresponding tags of list 9 of reference.
According to one embodiment, during the verification, a notation 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 notation 12 on the performance of the 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 by compared to other preliminary evaluations of the same user 3 or a notable evolution in its performances.

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, intervening in the calculation of said notation 12 at the time of verification.
In addition, the additional criteria may relate to related aspects of content 1, such as an attitude or physical behavior, the way of speaking such as elocution, the distribution and good management of speaking time. , etc. The additional criteria therefore focus more on the form of the content 1, rather than the substance. In short, the additional criteria do not target what is said, the substance, but rather the way of saying it, the form, namely to transmit the oral and/or visual information of said content 1.
In addition, the additional criteria concern all content 1, from beginning to end. They can therefore be repeated with criteria that can be selected 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 course.

Moreover, the table is part of said interface.
Such a table can be a cross-form, with rows and columns defining boxes. In addition, in the first column, are entered in each box the said additional criteria, one per line, while, on the first line and from the second column, are entered in each box estimates of value, based on one estimate per column. The user 3 or the supervisor 4 can then choose a box to apply a single value estimate per additional criterion. Therefore, the form is exclusive, allowing to select only one box per line, ie only one estimate per additional criterion.
The reverse is also possible, distributing the additional criteria by column and the estimates by row.
By way of example, the estimates of values can be, from a negative value to a positive value: very insufficient, insufficient, neutral, satisfactory, very satisfactory.

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 evaluation. Similarly, user 3 can complete 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 of the two tables, in order to apply malus, similarly to the 50 scale.

Advantageously, according to one embodiment, before said assessment, namely before carrying out any reference or additional assessment, but above all before the reference assessment if it takes place first, the supervisor 4 defines the possible criteria, in particular by depending on 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 the 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 obliquely, as well as the 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, can be considered, depending on the alphabet, for example Cyrillic or Arabic, or even for an Asian language, again to make it easier to read and understand 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 on the , the polygon comprises four vertices, resembling a rhombus 15. According to the embodiments visible on the , the polygon has five vertices, forming a regular pentagon 16. Further, a lower edge is oriented horizontally.
Preferably, according to the embodiments visible on the , the polygon comprises six vertices, in the form of a regular hexagon 17 . Further, a lower edge is oriented horizontally.
Other polygons with seven or more vertices can be considered.

Further on, 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. In addition, each button 6 has the same dimensions.
Consequently, for the diamond 15, we obtain four buttons 6 for four different criteria, as visible on the first representation of the . For the pentagon, we get five buttons 6, etc.

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. Therefore, 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 can be seen in particular in the central representations of FIGS. 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 particularly visible in the last representations of Figures 1 to 3, combined with the portions 18 divided into sections 19.
Thus, a model 13 is obtained 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.

As such, 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 a ordered list, which it is possible to classify, 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/dropping a tool from the library to the grid 14 of the model 13, making it possible in particular to position the criterion at a precise location.
According to another possibility, the choice is made by simple validation of the criterion in the library, its positioning in the grid 14 taking place automatically, at a determined location, in particular with respect to the label or the name of the said chosen criterion, or else by compared to its category 5.
Indeed, a possibility of positioning the criteria can be carried out according to a proximity arrangement 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 each other. the criteria of another close category, and so on. Thus, the grid 14 comprises in a diametrically opposite way the criteria of the furthest categories according to the scale 50. In addition, this specific arrangement makes it possible, in the case of categories highlighted by colors, to obtain a colored distribution according to a color wheel.
Alternatively, it is possible to arbitrarily position each of the selected criteria.

Next, the grid 14 of said model 13 is dimensioned 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 has been completed, to choose an additional criterion and to 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 of the grid 14 is notably visible in dotted lines on the . 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 can comprise thirteen to thirty-one buttons 6.
According to other configurations, the grid 14 of a hexagon can comprise from six to sixty-one buttons 6.
It will be noted that the grid 14 can then be complete or not, namely that all the sections 19 are fulfilled by a chosen criterion, or else that some remain empty. Consequently, the empty sections 19 are inactive. Preferably, the system 2 can plan to authorize the saving of a model 13 only 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.

In addition, during the configuration step, it is also possible to configure the subsidiary assessment table, by choosing the additional criteria to be introduced there, as well as by choosing the value estimates. Such parameterization of the table is carried out by the supervisor 4.
Furthermore, adding or deleting an additional criterion automatically sizes said table, updating the related form.

Relatedly, as mentioned previously, in the context 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, with a view to performing the required steps. by the embodiments of the evaluation system 2.

Thus, the invention offers an evaluation system 2 that is simple and quick 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 a visibility adapted to the criteria in 6 buttons distributed intelligently, for an intuitive use.

Moreover, the system 2 is dedicated to an appreciation of a content 1 taking place 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 (16)

Digital evaluation system (2), executed by at least one piece of computer equipment, in which
- at least one assessment of a content (1) is carried out 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,
- launch the start of said content (1),
- during the scrolling of said content (1) until it stops, at least at a moment (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. Evaluation system (2) according to the preceding claim, characterized in that it consists in
- carry out a reference assessment by a supervisor (4) and obtain a reference list (9) successively containing each reference time-stamped tag (8);
- performing at least one additional assessment by a user (3) and obtaining an additional list (10) successively containing each additional timestamped tag (8);
- performing a quantification (11) of said additional assessment by automatic comparison between the additional list (10) and the reference list (9). Evaluation system (2) according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that
- said content (1) is in digital audio and/or video format, preferably in video format. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that during the evaluation,
- the scrolling of said content (1) is operated continuously. Evaluation system (2) according to Claim 2, 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 list ( 10) additional with the corresponding criterion of the reference list (9). 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. 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 shape 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. 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. Evaluation system (2) according to one of Claims 7 or 8, 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. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of Claims 7 to 9, characterized in that
- the regular polygon comprises at least three vertices, preferably six vertices. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of Claims 7 to 10, characterized in that, during configuration
- a choice of said criteria is made in relation 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. Evaluation system (2) according to Claim 2, characterized in that, during the reference evaluation,
- 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). Evaluation system (2) according to Claim 6, characterized in that, during the verification,
- a rating (12) is calculated from an average of each ratio. Evaluation system (2) according to claim 2 and 13, characterized in that
- the supervisor manually weights said rating (12). Evaluation system (2) according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that
- Parameter by adding, deleting or modifying, at least one criterion in a library grouping together all the criteria, in particular a label, a denomination, a location and/or a category of said at least one criterion. Evaluation system (2) according to any one of the preceding claims, characterized in that, during each evaluation,
- 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, involved in the calculation of said notation (12) at the time of the cheking process.