A Sign-Component-Based Framework for Chinese Sign Language Recognition Using Accelerometer and sEMG Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identification of constituent components of each sign gesture can be beneficial to the improved performance of sign language recognition (SLR), especially for large-vocabulary SLR systems. Aiming at developing such a system using portable accelerometer (ACC) and surface electromyographic (sEMG) sensors, we propose a framework for automatic Chinese SLR at the component level. In the proposed framework, data segmentation, as an important preprocessing operation, is performed to divide a continuous sign language sentence into subword segments. Based on the features extracted from ACC and sEMG data, three basic components of sign subwords, namely the hand shape, orientation, and movement, are further modeled and the corresponding component classifiers are learned. At the decision level, a sequence of subwords can be recognized by fusing the likelihoods at the component level. The overall classification accuracy of 96.5% for a vocabulary of 120 signs and 86.7% for 200 sentences demonstrate the feasibility of interpreting sign components from ACC and sEMG data and clearly show the superior recognition performance of the proposed method when compared with the previous SLR method at the subword level. The proposed method seems promising for implementing large-vocabulary portable SLR systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".