Optimized Limited Memory and Warping LCSS for Online Gesture Recognition or Overlearning?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present and evaluate a new algorithm for online gesture recognition in noisy streams. This \ntechnique relies upon the proposed LM-WLCSS (Limited Memory and Warping LCSS) algorithm that has demonstrated its efficiency on gesture recognition. This new method involves a quantization step (via the KMeans clustering algorithm). This transforms new data to a finite set. In this way, each new sample can be compared to several templates (one per class) and gestures are rejected based on a previously trained rejection threshold. Then, an algorithm, called SearchMax, find a local maximum within a sliding window and output whether or not the gesture has been recognized. In order to resolve conflicts that may occur, another classifier could be completed. As the K-Means clustering algorithm, needs to be initialized with the number of clusters to create, we also introduce a straightforward optimization process. Such an operation also optimizes the window size for the SearchMax algorithm. In order to demonstrate the robustness of our algorithm, an experiment has been performed over two different data sets. However, results on tested data sets are only accurate when training data are used as test data. This may be due to the fact that the method is in an overlearning state.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".