Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we introduce our method for enabling dynamic gesture recognition for hand gestures. Like a number of other research work focusing on gesture recognition we use a camera to track the motions and interpret these in terms of actual meaningful gestures; however we emphasise the tracking of fingers as well as the hand in order to cover a much wider range of gestures. The recognition is processed as part of three key stages, with a fourth in development. The first stage processes the visual information from the camera, and identifies the key regions and elements (such as the hand and fingers), this classified information is passed to a 2D to 3D module that transforms the 2D classified information into a full 3D space applying it to a calibrated hand model using inverse projection matrices and inverse kinematics. Simplifying this model into posture curvature information we apply this to a hidden Markov model (HMM). This model is used to identify and differentiate between different gestures, even ones using the same finger combinations. We briefly discuss our current development in the application of context awareness to this scenario, which is used in combination with the HMM in order to apply a different semantic to each gesture. This is especially useful due to the huge overlap in semantics specifically appropriated to hand gestures
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it