unethical mortgage loan modification company

ComplaintsScamsmortgage funding

Complaint

0
tom hoyt
Country: United States
I received a call from JetDirectfunding. they sounded legit and I decided I would work with them. Once they had important information from me, the main contact email no longer worked or would anyone answer the phone or return calls. here is then name of the person. I strongly caution anyone from dealing with this company in the future!


Ryan A. Quadrel
Modification Consultant
Jet Direct Funding Corp.
www.jetdirectfunding.com

139 South 11th St.
Lindenhurst, NY 11757
Office (800) 721-9919 x619
Fax (631) 574-1450
Cell (973) 668-9262

Comments

  • 0
    tj
    | 2 replies
    Did you pay them money up front?
    • 0
      The field of augmentative and alternativ replies to tj
      | 1 reply
      The field of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) is
      concerned with assisting individuals with severe physical and language
      impairments to communicate more effectively. Existing AAC systems make
      use of a variety of approaches to accelerate sentence generation,
      including different selection methods, encoding strategies, and
      natural language processing. Augmented communicators continue to
      produce words at a very slow rate, and have difficulty participating
      actively in conversation.

      However, only recently have AAC systems begun to make use of the
      predictable patterns that occur in conversation. To date, such systems
      have focussed on either highly constrained and relatively content-free
      utterances, or on loosely structured, monologue type text.

      This thesis develops an alternative but compatible approach to
      facilitating conver sational participation in AAC which attempts to
      target a broader range of conversations, representing both their
      content and structure. Motivated by schema theory, this approach
      applies schema structures to the domain of conversation. A set of
      structures is proposed with which text from past conversations can be
      made available for reuse.

      To demonstrate this approach, a prototype is developed and
      evaluated. The prototype behaves as an interface that augments a
      user's current AAC system by providing access to conversational
      schemata created and updated by the user. In the evaluation study, two
      individuals used the interface while taking part in a series of mock
      job interviews. Results of the study were encouraging.

      Chapter 1

      INTRODUCTION

      An individual who uses an augmentative communication system gains an
      alternative voice, one that can augment and complement a natural
      voice that is difficult to pro duce or to understand. In order to
      "speak" with this alternative voice, augmentative communication
      systems require the individual to physically select symbols
      representing the words to be spoken, either by hand or using some
      other motor channel. Dependence on motor abilities that are also
      impaired, however, means that utterances can take much time and effort
      to produce.

      To reduce this time to speak, systems could make sentences or larger
      segments of text available as single units. Such "reusable" text could
      then be spoken, as is, with very little effort. Alternatively, when
      reusable text is not available, the individual could select fewer
      items and speak in short, or incomplete, sentences. Although these two
      strategies might both reduce the time to produce a sentence, speaking
      with incomplete sentences, or with noticeably "canned" sentences that
      are not quite context-appropriate, can be interpreted by unfamiliar
      listeners as signs of cognitive impairment.

      The challenge to the designers of augmentative and alternative
      communication (AAC) systems, therefore, becomes one of increasing the
      rate of spoken output without compromising the image of the augmented
      communicator, the individual using the system. Contextual information
      is very important during conversation for determining both the meaning
      and the appropriateness of an utterance. Within the proper context,
      then, reusable text that is made available and selected by the user
      will not sound canned. However, such precise contextual information is
      not available, in an automatic fashion, to current AAC systems.

      It is, however, available to the individual who is speaking through
      the system. The individual is aware of the situation in which the
      conversation is taking place, and of the intended self-image. The
      challenge for the system becomes one of making context-appropriate
      reusable text available to the individual in a reasonable amount of
      time and without excessive cognitive load. This interaction between
      system and user should involve as little effort as possible during a
      conversation, so that the individual can concentrate on the topic and
      on the other participants.

      I suggest that there are three requirements for an AAC system to
      facilitate conversational interaction:

      (1) the augmented communicator produces text at some time prior to
          the conversation, and stores it in the system;

      (2) the AAC system supports an organization for stored text that is
          consis tent with observed features and patterns in conversation;

      (3) during a conversation, and with very little effort, the augmented
          communicator is able to retrieve desired and appropriate
          pre-stored text.

      Requirement (1), the pre-storage of text, is already a common feature
      in many systems. However, few systems offer real support for (2) and
      (3), structuring and retrieving this text for conversation. Notable
      exceptions are the systems CHAT and TOPIC that were developed at the
      University of Dundee (and their realization as a commercial product,
      Talk:About, manufactured by Don Johnston Inc.). CHAT (Alm et al.,
      1992) supported quick production of simple utterances, including
      greetings, small talk, and farewells, applicable in many
      conversational contexts. TOPIC (Alm et al., 1989) provided a database
      of reusable text, taken from previous conversations and linked by
      topic, and was concerned mainly with the monologue-type segments that
      occur in the body of a conversation.

      This thesis discusses an alternative, possibly complementary, approach
      to organizing and retrieving pre-stored conversational text in an AAC
      system. This approach is motivated by Schank's (1982) description of
      schemata, representing the dependence of how we behave and think on
      how we behaved and thought in similar situations in the
      past. Situations that are judged similar are grouped together to form
      the basis for expectations about future instances of similar
      situations. These can include expectations about what people or things
      will be involved in a situation, what events will occur, and in what
      order they will occur. An individual's cognitive system can store
      experiences more efficiently in this "schematized" form, and can
      organize new experiences around these schemata.

      In this thesis, I explore the notion of storing reusable text for
      schematized situations in a manner similar to that described by
      Schank's schemata. The intuition is that an AAC system which
      represents conversation similarly to our own cognitive system should
      be able to offer the user access to conversational text in a way that
      is both intuitive and efficient. In pursuit of this goal, a prototype
      interface, SchemaTalk, has been developed that adds schematic
      organization to a text-based AAC system, and enables the user to
      access that information. The effectiveness of this configuration was
      investigated in a study in which two participants, involved in mock
      job interviews, communicated using the interface and sentences they
      had organized into schemata.

      Chapter 2

      AUGMENTATIVE AND ALTERNATIVE COMMUNICATION

      In North America, there are over two million people unable to speak
      adequately to meet their communication needs (American
      Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 1991; cited in Beukelman &
      Mirenda, 1992, p. 4). The field of augmentative and alternative
      communication is concerned with developing methods and devices, tuned
      to the abilities of each individual, to facilitate active and
      effective participation in conversation and other forms of
      communication (e.g., writing). In this thesis, I will focus on
      augmenting spoken conversation, and on electronic AAC systems with
      speech synthesis capabilities.

      2.1 AAC Users

      The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) gives the
      following definition for the population of individuals who might use
      AAC systems:

      Individuals with severe communication disorders are those who may bene
      fit from [AAC] -- those for whom gestural, speech, and/or written
      communication is temporarily or permanently inadequate to meet all of
      their communication needs. (American Speech-Language-Hearing
      Association, 1991, p. 10; quoted in Beukelman & Mirenda, 1992, p. 4)

      Emphasis is placed on the individual's natural modes of communication
      not being adequate to meet all of their needs. In some situations,
      and with some conversational partners, individuals may prefer to
      communicate with their natural voice or gestures, and may find it more
      effective to do so.

      Communication may be severely impaired as a consequence of a
      congenital neurologic dysfunction, such as cerebral palsy, mental
      retardation, autism, developmental verbal apraxia, and specific
      language disorders (Mirenda & Mathy-Laikko, 1989, p. 3). Severe
      communication impairment may also be acquired as a result of
      amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), multiple sclerosis (MS), brain
      injury, stroke, or spinal cord injury (SCI) (Beukelman & Yorkston,
      1989, pp. 42-47).

      These same neurological conditions may impair non-language motor
      abilities and perception, as well. Motor deficits, such as hypertonic
      muscle tone, often accompany cerebral palsy, as do visual and hearing
      deficits (Mirenda & Mathy-Laikko, 1989, p. 4). Acquired brain or
      spinal injuries may result in limited mobility or sensory losses. The
      ability to control a communication device that relies on motor input
      will, in many cases, be affected.

      2.2 Communicative Competence

      The goal of AAC is to assist the user in becoming a competent
      communicator. Light defines communicative competence as the ability
      "to initiate and maintain daily interactions within the natural
      environment" (1989, pp. 138) adequately to meet daily needs. This
      presupposes knowledge, judgment, and skill in four areas (Light, 1989,
      pp. 139):

      (1) linguistic competence, using the rules of the language code
          (phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics);

      (2) operational competence, using the AAC system itself (e.g.,
          controlling the volume, retrieving and producing a word);

      (3) social competence, interacting with others (e.g., initiating a
          conversation, reacting to what another person says);

      (4) strategic competence, adapting to a situation and compensating
          for any difficulties that may arise (e.g., rephrasing an
          utterance if the listener did not understand it, rather than
          simply repeating it).

      As well, communicative competence is relative, not absolute. An
      individual may be competent interacting with one partner but not with
      another, in one situation but not another, or at one stage of the
      conversation but not another.

      People interact for a variety of reasons: to communicate their wants
      or needs, to convey or receive other information, to increase social
      closeness, and to fulfil the require ments of social etiquette (Light,
      1988, p. 76). Interactions with different goals may differ in many
      ways. Social etiquette and expression of wants and needs, for example,
      may be characterized by highly predictable interactions in which
      communication rate is very im portant. Communication rate may also be
      important when the goal of the interaction is to convey or receive
      information (Light, 1988, p. 76).

      AAC systems need to recognize these varying demands in order to
      support communication more effectively.

      2.3 Components of an AAC System

      An AAC system (Figure 2.1) can be described in terms of its language
      model, and its input and output interfaces (Demasco & Mineo,
      1995). The input interface provides the user with a method for
      selecting symbols (letters, words, or icons) represented in the
      system. How symbols are represented, organized and processed is
      specified in the language model. The user's message is presented by
      the output interface.

      Currently, AAC systems can accept input from a wide variety of
      devices. Keys on a keyboard can be selected with the user's hands, or
      with a stick fastened to a head-mount or held in the user's mouth. For
      users with more limited motion, switch devices can be activated by
      movement of the hand, foot, or eyebrow. A beam of light, emitted from
      a head mounted source and detected by receivers on the AAC system, can
      be used to make selections on a switch or a keyboard. There is even
      work in progress to detect and follow the user's eye gaze (Sandler,
      1994).

      Figure 2.1: Components of an AAC system
      [Figure Diagram]

      LANGUAGE MODEL: - representation - organization - processing

      PHYSICAL INPUT INTERFACE: - input devices - selection methods

      PHYSICAL OUTPUT INTERFACE: - output devices

      Selection methods can be generally classified as either direct or
      scanning. With direct selection, the user indicates the desired item
      from a set of items (Beukelman & Mirenda, 1992, p. 58). Spelling words
      on a computer keyboard is an example of direct selection. Each key
      represents a letter in the alphabet and is selected by the user via a
      key stroke. Using a scanning method, items in the set are displayed in
      some predetermined or der by the system, or by a conversational
      partner or facilitator, and the user indicates when the desired item
      has been presented (Beukelman & Mirenda, 1992, p. 62). In row-column
      scanning, for example, symbols are organized into rows and columns and
      the system high lights rows until the user indicates the row
      containing the desired symbol. The system then highlights columns
      until the user indicates the column containing the desired symbol. The
      system selects the symbol located at the point where that row and
      column intersect.

      Scanning input can be slower than direct selection, because the user
      must wait while the system traverses undesired items. However, direct
      selection of even a relatively small number of items requires a fair
      amount of motor dexterity. With scanning, an individual with severely
      limited motor abilities is potentially able to select any symbol repre
      sented in the system using only a single key or switch.

      The words and messages of the language model that are available for
      selection on an AAC system can be represented in a variety of symbol
      sets. The most appropriate set for a specific user will depend on that
      user's age, cognitive and language abilities, and perceptual abilities
      (see Beukelman & Mirenda, 1992, pp. 21-27, for a discussion on
      "representational symbols"). Letters, pictures, abstracted icon sets,
      or combinations of all three are used by different systems.

      The symbols available in a system must be organized and displayed to
      the user in some fashion. For instance, in a letter-based system
      performing row-column scanning, decisions must be made about how many
      rows and columns to use, and in which order the letters should occur
      in the columns. A system may contain more symbols than it can display
      at one time. Symbols must then be organized to provide the user with a
      consistent method for accessing them. This organization includes how
      symbols are physically distributed on the system display, as well as
      how hidden symbols are reached.

      In addition to providing this vocabulary of symbols, an AAC system may
      provide processing capabilities to facilitate its use. For instance, a
      vocabulary symbol may have a phrase or sentence associated with it
      which is retrieved by the system when the symbol is selected. Several
      strategies of processing to increase communication rate are discussed
      in Section 2.4.

      Both visual and spoken output are available on many AAC
      systems. Visual output methods include displaying symbols on a
      computer screen, or printing symbols out on paper. Spoken output is
      achieved with either digitized or synthesized speech. Digitized speech
      is pre-recorded and fixed, while synthesized speech is generated at
      the time of message production and is not constrained in terms of
      message content. However, the voice quality of digitized speech is far
      more natural than that of synthesized speech in current AAC systems.

      2.4 Strategies for Accelerating Message Production

      One of the great challenges to AAC has been to increase the rate of
      message production by augmented communicators. With AAC systems,
      production rates of between 2 and 20 words per minute are not
      uncommon, an order of magnitude slower than for un augmented speakers
      using their natural voices (Kraat, 1987, p. 63). This slow production
      rate may affect how augmented communicators participate in
      conversations, and how they are viewed by their conversational
      partners.

      Two acceleration strategies used in existing AAC systems are message
      encoding and message prediction. Compansion, a third acceleration
      strategy, in which the user in puts a sentence in "telegraphic" style
      and the system completes the sentence, is discussed in Section 2.5.1.

      Message encoding refers to retrieving a word, or a longer unit of
      text, by using an associated code that requires fewer
      selections. Codes can consist of letters, numbers, icons, or some
      combination of these. For example, "Please open the door" may be
      associated with the code "OD", the initial letters of the salient
      words "open" and "door" (salient letter codes, Light & Lindsay, 1992,
      p. 35). An alternate encoding might be "DD", be cause the sentence is
      giving "directions" regarding the "door" (letter category codes, Light
      & Lindsay, 1992, p. 35).

      Flexible abbreviation expansion (Stum & Demasco, 1992) is an
      alternative letter coding system for abbreviating words. In a standard
      coding or abbreviation scheme, there is a fixed set of codes which is
      stored by the user ahead of time. The processing done by the system is
      a simple table look-up. In contrast, flexible abbreviation expansion
      has no fixed table of codes. Instead, the user and system follow rules
      to expand the letter codes.

      Message prediction is a dynamic strategy, whereby the system makes use
      of earlier portions of the message to interpret and predict the next
      icon, letter, word, or larger segment of text (Beukelman & Mirenda,
      1992, pp. 42-44). On a spelling-based system, for example, after the
      user selects the letters "s", "t", and "u", the system may predict the
      word in progress to be "student", "stupid", or "studying". If the
      intended word is in this list, the user can select it immediately
      rather than continuing to spell it. A system could also make use of
      syntax rules (VanDyke et al., 1992) to better predict the intended
      word.

      2.5 Example AAC Techniques

      To illustrate possible techniques for AAC, two systems are described
      here in detail. The first, Compansion, is different from other
      systems in that it uses natural language processing techniques to
      complete a telegraphic sentence once the user has entered it. The
      second system, the Liberator TM (Prentke Romich Company), is an
      example of a commercially available system, and contains a variety of
      tools with which the user can edit and navigate through stored
      text. One participant in the evaluation study, discussed in Chapter 5,
      normally communicates using the Liberator.
      • 0
        The field of augmentative and alternativ replies to The field of augmentative and alternativ
        The field of augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) is
        concerned with assisting individuals with severe physical and language
        impairments to communicate more effectively. Existing AAC systems make
        use of a variety of approaches to accelerate sentence generation,
        including different selection methods, encoding strategies, and
        natural language processing. Augmented communicators continue to
        produce words at a very slow rate, and have difficulty participating
        actively in conversation.

        However, only recently have AAC systems begun to make use of the
        predictable patterns that occur in conversation. To date, such systems
        have focussed on either highly constrained and relatively content-free
        utterances, or on loosely structured, monologue type text.

        This thesis develops an alternative but compatible approach to
        facilitating conver sational participation in AAC which attempts to
        target a broader range of conversations, representing both their
        content and structure. Motivated by schema theory, this approach
        applies schema structures to the domain of conversation. A set of
        structures is proposed with which text from past conversations can be
        made available for reuse.

        To demonstrate this approach, a prototype is developed and
        evaluated. The prototype behaves as an interface that augments a
        user's current AAC system by providing access to conversational
        schemata created and updated by the user. In the evaluation study, two
        individuals used the interface while taking part in a series of mock
        job interviews. Results of the study were encouraging.

        Chapter 1

        INTRODUCTION

        An individual who uses an augmentative communication system gains an
        alternative voice, one that can augment and complement a natural
        voice that is difficult to pro duce or to understand. In order to
        "speak" with this alternative voice, augmentative communication
        systems require the individual to physically select symbols
        representing the words to be spoken, either by hand or using some
        other motor channel. Dependence on motor abilities that are also
        impaired, however, means that utterances can take much time and effort
        to produce.

        To reduce this time to speak, systems could make sentences or larger
        segments of text available as single units. Such "reusable" text could
        then be spoken, as is, with very little effort. Alternatively, when
        reusable text is not available, the individual could select fewer
        items and speak in short, or incomplete, sentences. Although these two
        strategies might both reduce the time to produce a sentence, speaking
        with incomplete sentences, or with noticeably "canned" sentences that
        are not quite context-appropriate, can be interpreted by unfamiliar
        listeners as signs of cognitive impairment.

        The challenge to the designers of augmentative and alternative
        communication (AAC) systems, therefore, becomes one of increasing the
        rate of spoken output without compromising the image of the augmented
        communicator, the individual using the system. Contextual information
        is very important during conversation for determining both the meaning
        and the appropriateness of an utterance. Within the proper context,
        then, reusable text that is made available and selected by the user
        will not sound canned. However, such precise contextual information is
        not available, in an automatic fashion, to current AAC systems.

        It is, however, available to the individual who is speaking through
        the system. The individual is aware of the situation in which the
        conversation is taking place, and of the intended self-image. The
        challenge for the system becomes one of making context-appropriate
        reusable text available to the individual in a reasonable amount of
        time and without excessive cognitive load. This interaction between
        system and user should involve as little effort as possible during a
        conversation, so that the individual can concentrate on the topic and
        on the other participants.

        I suggest that there are three requirements for an AAC system to
        facilitate conversational interaction:

        (1) the augmented communicator produces text at some time prior to
           the conversation, and stores it in the system;

        (2) the AAC system supports an organization for stored text that is
           consis tent with observed features and patterns in conversation;

        (3) during a conversation, and with very little effort, the augmented
           communicator is able to retrieve desired and appropriate
           pre-stored text.

        Requirement (1), the pre-storage of text, is already a common feature
        in many systems. However, few systems offer real support for (2) and
        (3), structuring and retrieving this text for conversation. Notable
        exceptions are the systems CHAT and TOPIC that were developed at the
        University of Dundee (and their realization as a commercial product,
        Talk:About, manufactured by Don Johnston Inc.). CHAT (Alm et al.,
        1992) supported quick production of simple utterances, including
        greetings, small talk, and farewells, applicable in many
        conversational contexts. TOPIC (Alm et al., 1989) provided a database
        of reusable text, taken from previous conversations and linked by
        topic, and was concerned mainly with the monologue-type segments that
        occur in the body of a conversation.

        This thesis discusses an alternative, possibly complementary, approach
        to organizing and retrieving pre-stored conversational text in an AAC
        system. This approach is motivated by Schank's (1982) description of
        schemata, representing the dependence of how we behave and think on
        how we behaved and thought in similar situations in the
        past. Situations that are judged similar are grouped together to form
        the basis for expectations about future instances of similar
        situations. These can include expectations about what people or things
        will be involved in a situation, what events will occur, and in what
        order they will occur. An individual's cognitive system can store
        experiences more efficiently in this "schematized" form, and can
        organize new experiences around these schemata.

        In this thesis, I explore the notion of storing reusable text for
        schematized situations in a manner similar to that described by
        Schank's schemata. The intuition is that an AAC system which
        represents conversation similarly to our own cognitive system should
        be able to offer the user access to conversational text in a way that
        is both intuitive and efficient. In pursuit of this goal, a prototype
        interface, SchemaTalk, has been developed that adds schematic
        organization to a text-based AAC system, and enables the user to
        access that information. The effectiveness of this configuration was
        investigated in a study in which two participants, involved in mock
        job interviews, communicated using the interface and sentences they
        had organized into schemata.

        Chapter 2

        AUGMENTATIVE AND ALTERNATIVE COMMUNICATION

        In North America, there are over two million people unable to speak
        adequately to meet their communication needs (American
        Speech-Language-Hearing Association, 1991; cited in Beukelman &
        Mirenda, 1992, p. 4). The field of augmentative and alternative
        communication is concerned with developing methods and devices, tuned
        to the abilities of each individual, to facilitate active and
        effective participation in conversation and other forms of
        communication (e.g., writing). In this thesis, I will focus on
        augmenting spoken conversation, and on electronic AAC systems with
        speech synthesis capabilities.

        2.1 AAC Users

        The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) gives the
        following definition for the population of individuals who might use
        AAC systems:

        Individuals with severe communication disorders are those who may bene
        fit from [AAC] -- those for whom gestural, speech, and/or written
        communication is temporarily or permanently inadequate to meet all of
        their communication needs. (American Speech-Language-Hearing
        Association, 1991, p. 10; quoted in Beukelman & Mirenda, 1992, p. 4)

        Emphasis is placed on the individual's natural modes of communication
        not being adequate to meet all of their needs. In some situations,
        and with some conversational partners, individuals may prefer to
        communicate with their natural voice or gestures, and may find it more
        effective to do so.

        Communication may be severely impaired as a consequence of a
        congenital neurologic dysfunction, such as cerebral palsy, mental
        retardation, autism, developmental verbal apraxia, and specific
        language disorders (Mirenda & Mathy-Laikko, 1989, p. 3). Severe
        communication impairment may also be acquired as a result of
        amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), multiple sclerosis (MS), brain
        injury, stroke, or spinal cord injury (SCI) (Beukelman & Yorkston,
        1989, pp. 42-47).

        These same neurological conditions may impair non-language motor
        abilities and perception, as well. Motor deficits, such as hypertonic
        muscle tone, often accompany cerebral palsy, as do visual and hearing
        deficits (Mirenda & Mathy-Laikko, 1989, p. 4). Acquired brain or
        spinal injuries may result in limited mobility or sensory losses. The
        ability to control a communication device that relies on motor input
        will, in many cases, be affected.

        2.2 Communicative Competence

        The goal of AAC is to assist the user in becoming a competent
        communicator. Light defines communicative competence as the ability
        "to initiate and maintain daily interactions within the natural
        environment" (1989, pp. 138) adequately to meet daily needs. This
        presupposes knowledge, judgment, and skill in four areas (Light, 1989,
        pp. 139):

        (1) linguistic competence, using the rules of the language code
           (phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics);

        (2) operational competence, using the AAC system itself (e.g.,
           controlling the volume, retrieving and producing a word);

        (3) social competence, interacting with others (e.g., initiating a
           conversation, reacting to what another person says);

        (4) strategic competence, adapting to a situation and compensating
           for any difficulties that may arise (e.g., rephrasing an
           utterance if the listener did not understand it, rather than
           simply repeating it).

        As well, communicative competence is relative, not absolute. An
        individual may be competent interacting with one partner but not with
        another, in one situation but not another, or at one stage of the
        conversation but not another.

        People interact for a variety of reasons: to communicate their wants
        or needs, to convey or receive other information, to increase social
        closeness, and to fulfil the require ments of social etiquette (Light,
        1988, p. 76). Interactions with different goals may differ in many
        ways. Social etiquette and expression of wants and needs, for example,
        may be characterized by highly predictable interactions in which
        communication rate is very im portant. Communication rate may also be
        important when the goal of the interaction is to convey or receive
        information (Light, 1988, p. 76).

        AAC systems need to recognize these varying demands in order to
        support communication more effectively.

        2.3 Components of an AAC System

        An AAC system (Figure 2.1) can be described in terms of its language
        model, and its input and output interfaces (Demasco & Mineo,
        1995). The input interface provides the user with a method for
        selecting symbols (letters, words, or icons) represented in the
        system. How symbols are represented, organized and processed is
        specified in the language model. The user's message is presented by
        the output interface.

        Currently, AAC systems can accept input from a wide variety of
        devices. Keys on a keyboard can be selected with the user's hands, or
        with a stick fastened to a head-mount or held in the user's mouth. For
        users with more limited motion, switch devices can be activated by
        movement of the hand, foot, or eyebrow. A beam of light, emitted from
        a head mounted source and detected by receivers on the AAC system, can
        be used to make selections on a switch or a keyboard. There is even
        work in progress to detect and follow the user's eye gaze (Sandler,
        1994).

        Figure 2.1: Components of an AAC system
        [Figure Diagram]

        LANGUAGE MODEL: - representation - organization - processing

        PHYSICAL INPUT INTERFACE: - input devices - selection methods

        PHYSICAL OUTPUT INTERFACE: - output devices

        Selection methods can be generally classified as either direct or
        scanning. With direct selection, the user indicates the desired item
        from a set of items (Beukelman & Mirenda, 1992, p. 58). Spelling words
        on a computer keyboard is an example of direct selection. Each key
        represents a letter in the alphabet and is selected by the user via a
        key stroke. Using a scanning method, items in the set are displayed in
        some predetermined or der by the system, or by a conversational
        partner or facilitator, and the user indicates when the desired item
        has been presented (Beukelman & Mirenda, 1992, p. 62). In row-column
        scanning, for example, symbols are organized into rows and columns and
        the system high lights rows until the user indicates the row
        containing the desired symbol. The system then highlights columns
        until the user indicates the column containing the desired symbol. The
        system selects the symbol located at the point where that row and
        column intersect.

        Scanning input can be slower than direct selection, because the user
        must wait while the system traverses undesired items. However, direct
        selection of even a relatively small number of items requires a fair
        amount of motor dexterity. With scanning, an individual with severely
        limited motor abilities is potentially able to select any symbol repre
        sented in the system using only a single key or switch.

        The words and messages of the language model that are available for
        selection on an AAC system can be represented in a variety of symbol
        sets. The most appropriate set for a specific user will depend on that
        user's age, cognitive and language abilities, and perceptual abilities
        (see Beukelman & Mirenda, 1992, pp. 21-27, for a discussion on
        "representational symbols"). Letters, pictures, abstracted icon sets,
        or combinations of all three are used by different systems.

        The symbols available in a system must be organized and displayed to
        the user in some fashion. For instance, in a letter-based system
        performing row-column scanning, decisions must be made about how many
        rows and columns to use, and in which order the letters should occur
        in the columns. A system may contain more symbols than it can display
        at one time. Symbols must then be organized to provide the user with a
        consistent method for accessing them. This organization includes how
        symbols are physically distributed on the system display, as well as
        how hidden symbols are reached.

        In addition to providing this vocabulary of symbols, an AAC system may
        provide processing capabilities to facilitate its use. For instance, a
        vocabulary symbol may have a phrase or sentence associated with it
        which is retrieved by the system when the symbol is selected. Several
        strategies of processing to increase communication rate are discussed
        in Section 2.4.

        Both visual and spoken output are available on many AAC
        systems. Visual output methods include displaying symbols on a
        computer screen, or printing symbols out on paper. Spoken output is
        achieved with either digitized or synthesized speech. Digitized speech
        is pre-recorded and fixed, while synthesized speech is generated at
        the time of message production and is not constrained in terms of
        message content. However, the voice quality of digitized speech is far
        more natural than that of synthesized speech in current AAC systems.

        2.4 Strategies for Accelerating Message Production

        One of the great challenges to AAC has been to increase the rate of
        message production by augmented communicators. With AAC systems,
        production rates of between 2 and 20 words per minute are not
        uncommon, an order of magnitude slower than for un augmented speakers
        using their natural voices (Kraat, 1987, p. 63). This slow production
        rate may affect how augmented communicators participate in
        conversations, and how they are viewed by their conversational
        partners.

        Two acceleration strategies used in existing AAC systems are message
        encoding and message prediction. Compansion, a third acceleration
        strategy, in which the user in puts a sentence in "telegraphic" style
        and the system completes the sentence, is discussed in Section 2.5.1.

        Message encoding refers to retrieving a word, or a longer unit of
        text, by using an associated code that requires fewer
        selections. Codes can consist of letters, numbers, icons, or some
        combination of these. For example, "Please open the door" may be
        associated with the code "OD", the initial letters of the salient
        words "open" and "door" (salient letter codes, Light & Lindsay, 1992,
        p. 35). An alternate encoding might be "DD", be cause the sentence is
        giving "directions" regarding the "door" (letter category codes, Light
        & Lindsay, 1992, p. 35).

        Flexible abbreviation expansion (Stum & Demasco, 1992) is an
        alternative letter coding system for abbreviating words. In a standard
        coding or abbreviation scheme, there is a fixed set of codes which is
        stored by the user ahead of time. The processing done by the system is
        a simple table look-up. In contrast, flexible abbreviation expansion
        has no fixed table of codes. Instead, the user and system follow rules
        to expand the letter codes.

        Message prediction is a dynamic strategy, whereby the system makes use
        of earlier portions of the message to interpret and predict the next
        icon, letter, word, or larger segment of text (Beukelman & Mirenda,
        1992, pp. 42-44). On a spelling-based system, for example, after the
        user selects the letters "s", "t", and "u", the system may predict the
        word in progress to be "student", "stupid", or "studying". If the
        intended word is in this list, the user can select it immediately
        rather than continuing to spell it. A system could also make use of
        syntax rules (VanDyke et al., 1992) to better predict the intended
        word.

        2.5 Example AAC Techniques

        To illustrate possible techniques for AAC, two systems are described
        here in detail. The first, Compansion, is different from other
        systems in that it uses natural language processing techniques to
        complete a telegraphic sentence once the user has entered it. The
        second system, the Liberator TM (Prentke Romich Company), is an
        example of a commercially available system, and contains a variety of
        tools with which the user can edit and navigate through stored
        text. One participant in the evaluation study, discussed in Chapter 5,
        normally communicates using the Liberator.

        Complaint Categories

        Copyright complaintwire.org
  • 0
    jan 31
    they contacted me also and I paid them up front,do you have more information about the company
  • 0
    George Espinola
    I'm dealing with someone there named Marie Pasciotta. Why you don't call her at the 800 number (extension 605) and let me know the out come. I'm about to pay them to help me with my modification but would love to find out if they are for real and you just have bad luck or if they are a scam!! Act now and let me know it!!
  • 0
    Angel
    I was just wondering if you paid your money to these people.  They have also called me, and before I did anything Just wanted to ck them out further
  • 0
    Ryan Quadrel
    Mr. Hoyt:

    I apologize for the experience you had with the company I used to represent. As it stands, I am no longer affiliated with Jet Direct Funding. Once we processed your file, it was determined that you were not qualified for our services and you were supposed to receive a courtesy call from underwriting. I am not sure why you were not contacted.

    I have already submitted a request to Complaint Wire to remove this message, as it is a defamation to my character. I am currently working for a different company in the same industry and if you Google my name it comes up with this message. I am respectfully asking you to delete this posting, as your information was never disclosed, sold, or misused by Jet Direct or any other company to my knowledge.

    Thank you,
    Ryan
  • 0
    PJameson
    The only person that can modify your loan is your lender. Paying another company to modify your loan is a scam. Go to www.makinghomeaffordable.gov     This is a Government web site that says not to pay a 3rd party a fee help is free. Just call your bank yourself and save yourself the money. Do a little research it's not hard.
  • 0
    M florida
    Did any one have in fo abot this company I am about to send my paper in  Know I am very confused help hel help
  • 0
    Miget
    I was contacted by this company today......when I inquired the same information as to the fee cost, how the program would work was told that an approval would come in 3-5 days........and with that it was a 3100 dollar fee and 1200 due upon proocessing.....I was given a name of Jen Ginezi and an alternate of Perry if she wasn't avaliable.......I have not submitted any monies thought I would check out the website instead.....glad I did....
  • 0
    puma99
    http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/40643

    Read this story before paying money for a modification. What they don't know is banks take the names of the 3rd parties that call in on the behalf of you and report them to the FTC and other federal agencies. They will get what's coming to them sooner or later.
  • 0
    tom
    i was about to send in my paper glad i found this site perry told me it was garenteed to get me the modification i guess i should not trust perry
  • 0
    linda
    I paid up front a fee of $2500.00 I was told that I would get at least $425.00 to $525.00 reduction of my payments.  After waiting seven months, and speaking to them on a regular basis, I finally got a reduction of only $176.00 a month on a trial basis.  Even at that rate it will take me a over a year to break even on the amount I paid up front.  In addition, for the last twomdays I have been told that Irene would pull up my paperwork and call me back to explain the modofocation to me.  I have called four times and still no return call.  I can't leave my house because I am waiting for her call.  I am upset and angry.  I am in aworse situation than when I started and noone will even return my calls.
  • 0
    Jason
    Don't let Perry bully you. After numerous calls from his assistants he began calling me and was very harsh and rude and just tried to bully me into signing a contract and sending them money. Don't waste your time with Jet Direct. Contact your bank directly. That is all they will do is contact the bank on your behalf.
  • 0
    Veronica
    I don't know why there is such negative feed back against this company but I have worked with them for the last 2 months and have been treatedly very professionally. I must say they have put me and my family back on our feet and helped us from loosing our home, thank you Jet Direct Funding.
  • 0
    Todd
    Jet Direct Funding and it's employees have been helping me obtaing a modification. I must say in the begining I was a little worried bc of the complaints on here but Perry has been nothing but a great help and has guided me in the right path.The company is trusthworthy.
  • 0
    Cynthia
    After reading these comments I must say Perry is a little tough but he gets the job done. Sometimes it takes a little push to make it happen. When I had first staretd working with Jet Direct I was slacking on getting everything to them to work on my file if it wasn't for Perry this process would have taken alot longer and I would not be getting the extra money I am saving on my mortgage at the current time.
  • 0
    Dan
    He may be rought but he delivers on his word. He gives it to you as is would you rather someone lie to you.
  • 0
    Theresa
    I paid them upfront and had no issues with the service provided I am very satisfied with what this company has done for my family. Listen there are alot of bad people out there in the world but I do not see that with the individuals who have helped me at this company.
  • 0
    Jan
    I called and spoke to them apparently it turns out that they were very upfront and helpful with the advice they gave me about my mortgage situation.

Post a new comment