MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2265696903 · doi:10.1145/2799648

Gestures à Go Go

2015· article· en· W2265696903 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

VenueACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHand Gesture Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestureComputer scienceBootstrapping (finance)Human–computer interactionGesture recognitionQuality (philosophy)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Training a high-quality gesture recognizer requires providing a large number of examples to enable good performance on unseen, future data. However, recruiting participants, data collection, and labeling, etc., necessary for achieving this goal are usually time consuming and expensive. Thus, it is important to investigate how to empower developers to quickly collect gesture samples for improving UI usage and user experience. In response to this need, we introduce Gestures à Go Go ( g 3), a web service plus an accompanying web application for bootstrapping stroke gesture samples based on the kinematic theory of rapid human movements. The user only has to provide a gesture example once, and g 3 will create a model of that gesture. Then, by introducing local and global perturbations to the model parameters, g 3 generates from tens to thousands of synthetic human-like samples. Through a comprehensive evaluation, we show that synthesized gestures perform equally similar to gestures generated by human users. Ultimately, this work informs our understanding of designing better user interfaces that are driven by 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.230 · 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