Two gesture-computing approaches by using electromagnetic waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We are concerned with a novel sensor-based gesture input/ instruction technology which enables human beings to interact with computers conveniently. The human being wears an emitter on the finger or holds a digital pen that generates a time harmonic point charge. The inputs/instructions are performed through moving the finger or the digital pen. The computer recognizes the instruction by determining the motion trajectory of the dynamic point charge from the collected electromagnetic field measurement data. The identification process is mathematically modelled as a dynamic inverse source problem for time-dependent Maxwell's equations. From a practical point of view, the point source should be assumed to move in an unknown inhomogeneous background medium, which models the human body and the surroundings. Moreover, a salient feature is that the electromagnetic radiated data are only collected in a limited aperture. For the inverse problem, we develop, from the respectively deterministic and stochastic viewpoints, a dynamic direct sampling method and a modified particle filter method. Both approaches can effectively recover the motion trajectory. Rigorous theoretical justifications are presented for the mathematical modelling and the proposed recovery methods. Extensive numerical experiments are conducted to illustrate the promising features of the two proposed recognition approaches.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".