The system receives a good average usability rating (SUS 69.7, grade B) but with wide individual variation, which the authors take to suggest UI consistency issues¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · designr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2026 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person · recheck by 2029: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? The average SUS score was 69.7 (grade B), with individual scores ranging from 50.0 (D) to 92.5 (A). → Iwai Wataru 2026
Evidence¶
Iwai Wataru 2026¶
Iwai Wataru, Duc V . Nguyen. (2026). Design and Implementation of a Real-Time Multi-Site Immersive Learning System Using Photon Fusion. https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.10325 doi:10.48550/arxiv.2606.10325
q2 · i? · design · r2
SUS questionnaire administered after the one-hour lab session with 10 participants using Meta Quest 3 headsets. The average was "69.7, which corresponds to a grade of B", with scores from 50.0 to 92.5. No effect size is printed.
"The average SUS score was 69.7, which corresponds to a grade of B, indicating good usability. However, scores ranged widely from 50.0 (D) to 92.5 (A), showing significant variation in user evaluations."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- System usability was rated low in both conditions, with no significant difference between them — related
- The Bloom classification UI shows low perceived workload and high usability in a 50-participant user study — related
- Students rated the usability of the AIvaluate assessment in the SUS 'good' range — related
- Adults rated the LLM-powered iCub storytelling system as usable, with a total SUS score of 76.70 indicating good product usability — related
- The FACTRIA-aware chatbot received good usability ratings (SUS 70.84) and high usefulness ratings from most of the 11 stakeholders — related
- Students rated AISSA's usability as excellent, with an average SUS score of 83.38 from 30 of 46 pilot students — related
- Special-education practitioners rated AdaptED Stories as strongly usable, with a mean SUS score of 86.8 corresponding to an A grade — related
- After design adjustments, the LAD achieved good–excellent usability (SUS M = 4.13, equal to 78.25%) — related
- Older adults rated the KOKU digital programme with excellent usability and high acceptability — related
- Learner acceptance of AI simulations is generally high, with System Usability Scale scores of 61.6 to 78.56 and 72%-93% willingness to recommend — related
- Iterative generate-then-refine with multi-axis critiques raises the share of usable generated simulations from 3.5% after first generation to 69.3% after 10 improvement rounds — related
- Experimental-group participants rated TibetCPR highly usable (SUS = 84.3, an Excellent rating), with the highest items on voluntary engagement and independent use — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
photon-fusion-sus-good-but-variable-usability |
title |
The system receives a good average usability rating (SUS 69.7, grade B) but with wide individual variation, which the authors take to suggest UI consistency issues |
description |
The system receives a good average usability rating (SUS 69.7, grade B) but with wide individual variation, which the authors take to suggest UI consistency issues |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2026 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
recheck_by |
2029 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-11 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — iwai-wataru-2026 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.