MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Comparative Study of Deep Learning Models for American SL Recognition

2023· article· en· W4388951008 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Devanshi, Shuvam Mishra, Sahil Gupta, Ritika Singh, Santos Kumar Baliarsingh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicHand Gesture Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestureComputer scienceAlphabetArtificial intelligenceTransformerDeep learningSpeech recognitionMachine learningNatural language processingLinguisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

American SL (ASL) is a natural language employed by the deaf community in the United States as well as in some areas of Canada. ASL is a visual language that makes use of facial expressions, hand signs, and body language as means of communication, effectively conveying meaning to its users. In this research paper, we performed a comparative study of various deep learning approaches with the aim of accurately recognizing hand gestures in ASL. To conduct our comparative study, we created a comprehensive dataset of ASL hand gestures from A to Z, excluding J and Z, and trained each model on this dataset, it also included images from many sources with a range of backgrounds, lighting, and other environmental factors, making the dataset more resilient and adaptable. The models we evaluated included RNN, ConvNeXt, and Vision Transformer, as well as a computer vision-based approach. We assessed the accuracy of each model on each alphabet and the overall accuracy of each model across all alphabets. Our results shows that ConvNeXt achieve the highest overall accuracy of 99.670%, followed by RNN with 96.6664% accuracy and Vision Transformer with 95.2464% accuracy. These findings highlight the importance of using diverse deep-learning models and comprehensive datasets to accurately recognize ASL hand 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.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHand Gesture Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207