Introduction: We compared the print-to-speech properties and human performance characteristics of two artificial intelligence vision aids, Orcam MyEye 1 (a portable device) and Seeing AI (an iPhone and iPad application). Methods: There were seven participants with visual impairments who had no experience with the two reading aids. Four participants had no light perception. Two individuals with measurable acuity and one with light perception were tested while blindfolded. We also tested performance with text of varying appearance in varying viewing conditions. To evaluate human performance, we asked the participants to use the devices to attempt 12 reading tasks similar to activities of daily living. We assessed the ranges of text attributes for which reading was possible, such as print size, contrast, and light level. We also assessed if individuals could complete tasks with the devices and measured accuracy and completion time. Participants also completed a survey concerning the two aids. Results: Both aids achieved greater than 95% accuracy in text recognition for flat, plain word documents and ranged from 13 to 57% accuracy for formatted text on curved surfaces. Both aids could read print sizes as small as 0.8M (20/40 Snellen equivalent, 40 cm viewing distance). Individuals successfully completed 71% and 55% (p = .114) of tasks while using Orcam MyEye 1 and Seeing AI, respectively. There was no significant difference in time to completion of tasks (p = .775). Individuals believed both aids would be helpful for daily activities. Discussion: Orcam MyEye 1 and Seeing AI had similar text-reading capability and usability. Both aids were useful to users with severe visual impairments in performing reading tasks. Implications for Practitioners: Selection of a reading device or aid should be based on individual preferences and prior familiarity with the platform, since we found no clear superiority of one solution over the other.

简介：我们比较了两种人工智能视觉辅助工具 Orcam MyEye 1（便携式设备）和 Seeing AI（iPhone 和 iPad 应用程序）的打印到语音特性和人类性能特征。方法：有七名视力障碍的参与者没有使用这两种阅读辅助工具的经验。四名参与者没有光感。两名具有可测量敏锐度的人和一名具有光感的人在被蒙住眼睛的情况下接受了测试。我们还测试了在不同观看条件下具有不同外观的文本的性能。为了评估人类的表现，我们要求参与者使用这些设备尝试 12 项类似于日常生活活动的阅读任务。我们评估了可以阅读的文本属性范围，例如打印尺寸、对比度和亮度级别。我们还评估了个人是否可以使用这些设备完成任务并测量准确性和完成时间。参与者还完成了有关这两种辅助工具的调查。结果：两种辅助工具在平面、纯文字文档的文本识别准确率上都达到了 95% 以上，对曲面上的格式化文本的准确率在 13% 到 57% 之间。两种辅助工具都可以读取小至 0.8M 的打印尺寸（20/40 Snellen 等效值，40 厘米观看距离）。个人在使用 Orcam MyEye 1 和 Seeing AI 时分别成功完成了 71% 和 55% ( p = .114) 的任务。完成任务的时间没有显着差异 ( p = .775)。个人认为这两种辅助工具对日常活动都有帮助。讨论： Orcam MyEye 1 和 Seeing AI 具有相似的文本阅读能力和可用性。这两种辅助工具对于在执行阅读任务时有严重视力障碍的用户都很有用。对从业者的影响：阅读设备或辅助工具的选择应基于个人偏好和对平台的事先熟悉，因为我们没有发现一种解决方案明显优于另一种解决方案。