MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140180878 · doi:10.1109/imtc.2007.379090

Calibration and Error Model Analysis of 3D Monocular Vision Model Based Hand Posture Estimation

2007· article· en· W2140180878 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueConference proceedings - IEEE Instrumentation/Measurement Technology Conference · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHand Gesture Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSilhouetteComputer scienceGround truthMonocularMonocular visionCalibrationPoseProcess (computing)Measure (data warehouse)Image planeImage (mathematics)MathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we investigate the accuracy of vision based hand posture estimation using a single camera. We use a two step process to estimate the hand posture: we first generate 3D posture hypothesis using geometric and kinematics inverse transformations, and then validate the hypothesis by projecting the postures on the image plane and comparing the projected model with the ground truth using extracted hand color and silhouette features. We also calibrate the estimated posture joint angles with the corresponding angles acquired using a CyberGlove, and we use the interval of confidence of the estimated values as a measure of the vision based posture estimation accuracy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.240 · 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