MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1522114458 · doi:10.1109/bigmm.2015.31

Evaluating 3D Hand Motion with a Softkinetic Camera

2015· article· en· W1522114458 on OpenAlexaff
Amin Safaei, Q. M. Jonathan Wu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHand Gesture Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHidden Markov modelGestureComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGesture recognitionComputer visionFocus (optics)Motion (physics)Interface (matter)Human–computer interaction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gesture and motion evaluation provide an interface for a variety of human-computer interaction (HCI)applications. In particular, using human hand motions as a natural interface tool has motivated an active research area to conduct studies on modeling, analyzing and recognizing various hand motions. Recently, human-computer interaction has been a focus of research in vision-based gesture recognition. In this work, we propose a 3D hand model evaluation method that can recognize soft and elaborate representations of hand motions. The camera views landmarked points on the tips and joints of the fingers in the front plane and estimates the depth of these points using a Soft Kinetic camera [1], an Hidden Markov Model (HMM) is used to evaluate the hand motions. Experimentally, in an effort to evaluate the formation of hand gestures similar to those used in rehabilitation sessions, we studied three evolving motions. Given natural hand features and an uncontrolled environment, we were able to classify and differentiate any unnatural slowness of such motions.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHand Gesture Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207