MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Exploring Data Glove and Robotics Hand Exergaming: Lessons Learned

2020· article· en· W3089229046 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew Demoe, Álvaro Uribe-Quevedo, André de Lima Salgado, Hidenori Mimura, Kamen Kanev, Patrick C. K. Hung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWired glovePersonalizationUsabilityHuman–computer interactionComputer scienceMotion captureGestureRoboticsMultimediaMatch movingRobotCognitive loadCognitionMotion (physics)Artificial intelligenceSimulationVirtual realityPsychologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this preliminary study, we explore the use of a high-end data glove as a consumer-level hand exergame human interface device. Disorders affecting the musculoskeletal apparatus account for approximately 43 % of all workplace related injuries, leading to increasing claim costs and work absenteeism. Treatment includes unsupervised stretching and exercising with low adherence due to its monotonous and repetitive nature. Exergames, that is the use of games to elicit physical activity, provide engaging experiences that can help motive patients or workers into performing the exercises. Previous works using consumer-level technology have focused on image-based and open electronics 3D printed gloves that have shown the potential of exergames and motion capture as a tool to add immersion. In this paper, we present exergame that employs the Yamaha Data Glove (YDG) integrated to a computer- and robot-based exergame. The data glove allows controlling a virtual arcade crane in addition to interactive sessions with a social robot called ASUS Zenbo Junior. The preliminary quantitative and qualitative data suggest that motion capture data requires further processing and customization to tailor the experience to each user to improve usability and cognitive load affected by suitable tracking hand gestures. The exergame also requires additional cues to ease the experience and maintain users within a state flow.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.468
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.092 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→