IMU-Based Hand Gesture Interface Implementing a Sequence-Matching Algorithm for the Control of Assistive Technologies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assistive technologies (ATs) often have a high-dimensionality of possible movements (e.g., assistive robot with several degrees of freedom or a computer), but the users have to control them with low-dimensionality sensors and interfaces (e.g., switches). This paper presents the development of an open-source interface based on a sequence-matching algorithm for the control of ATs. Sequence matching allows the user to input several different commands with low-dimensionality sensors by not only recognizing their output, but also their sequential pattern through time, similarly to Morse code. In this paper, the algorithm is applied to the recognition of hand gestures, inputted using an inertial measurement unit worn by the user. An SVM-based algorithm, that is aimed to be robust, with small training sets (e.g., five examples per class) is developed to recognize gestures in real-time. Finally, the interface is applied to control a computer’s mouse and keyboard. The interface was compared against (and combined with) the head movement-based AssystMouse software. The hand gesture interface showed encouraging results for this application but could also be used with other body parts (e.g., head and feet) and could control various ATs (e.g., assistive robotic arm and prosthesis).
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.004 |
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".