MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990548414 · doi:10.20380/gi2019.09

Eliciting Wrist and Finger Gestures to Guide Recognizer Design

2019· article· en· W2990548414 on OpenAlex
Qi Feng Liu, Keiko Katsuragawa, Edward Lank

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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHand Gesture Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestureComputer scienceGesture recognitionRendering (computer graphics)WristModality (human–computer interaction)Set (abstract data type)Human–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceComputer visionSpeech recognitionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While hand gestures, i.e. movements of the fingers and wrist, are a low-effort input modality, sensing and recognition of these smallscale gestures is challenging. In particular, while many authors have explored varying designs of hardware to support hand gesture input, each systems recognize their own gesture set, rendering challenging comparisons between different capture and recognition systems. In this paper, we explore the design of hand and finger gesture input by conducting an elicitation study to understand the tradeoffs between hand, wrist, and arm gestures. Alongside this, to evaluate the overall potential of wrist-worn recognition, we explore the design of hardware to recognize gestures by contrasting an IMUonly recognizer with a simple low-cost wrist-flex sensor. We discuss the implications of our work both to the comparative evaluation of systems and to the design of enhanced hardware sensing.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.250
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