Recognizing diver hand gestures for human to robot communication underwater
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The underwater environment provides a range of interesting applications for human-robot teams. A critical issue for such teams is the development of an appropriate communication mechanism between humans and robots operating at depth. Humans operating at depth have developed an applied gesture-based communication language that can be leveraged to enable this communication, but it would be expensive and perhaps impractical to develop a hand-labelled dataset of these gestures to support a machine learning-based approach to the task. To avoid the cost of hand labelling such a large dataset, here we automate the process of collecting a labelled dataset through the use of a simple model trained on a hand-labelled dataset that only identifies salient objects (divers, their heads and hands), and then use a weakly supervised learning process to label a complex set of diver gestures. The result of this process is a system that can recognize a large number of diver hand gestures. Performance of the resulting system is compared against a hand-labelled set of diver gestures.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it