Novel Curve Signatures and a Combination Method for Thai On-Line Handwriting Character Recognition.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is no commercial character recognition software that supports Thai handwriting. Thai handwritten character recognition is needed to convert handwritten text written on mobile and tablet devices into computer encoded text. We propose a novel method that joins three curve signatures. The first signature is the normalized tangent angle function (TAF), which provides rough classification. The other two novel curve signatures are the relative position matrix (RPM), which is used to compare global curve features, and the straightened tangent angle function (STAF), which is used to compare the tangent angle along the cumulative unsigned curvature domain. In the recognition process, an input curve is extracted for these three signatures and the similarity against each character in the handwriting templates is measured. Then, the similarity scores are weighted and summed for ranking. Our experiment is done on 48 handwriting sample sets (44 Thai consonants appear in each set, and there are 4 sets per handwriting). Our methods yield an accuracy of 94.08% for personal handwriting, and 92.23% for general handwriting.
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 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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".