{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01715137956748695, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.212962962962963, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Inkbraille as a potential new reading system for the blind.

Inkbraille, a reduced size ink-image version of the familiar braille code, was conceived in an attempt to sidestep the major disadvantages of embossed braille, while retaining the unsurpassed reading rates achieved by the blind using that code. Inkbraille would ultimately be translated by a specially designed hand-held electronic device with appropriate tactile output. Such a device is not yet available, so in this study we test the readability of Inkbraille when read by means of a commercially available electronic reading aid, the Optacon, which presents its output tactually on a field of vibrating pins which are sensed with a finger. Three modes of tactual reading were compared: conventional embossed braille, and the Opticon's vibrating-pinfield presentation of typed letters and its presentation of Inkbraille. All subjects were able to read Inkbraille upon initial exposure. Subjects who were tested in multiple sessions exhibited significant increases in Inkbraille reading rates after only limited exposure. Since Inkbraille and letterprint reading rates were the same in this study, the results led the authors to conclude that a rate limitation may have been imposed by the device (the Optacon) that was used to translate both the Inkbraille and the letterprint.