MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Spiking Neural Networks for sEMG-Based Hand Gesture Recognition

2023· article· en· W4391331234 on OpenAlexaff
Mansooreh Montazerin, Farnoosh Naderkhani, Arash Mohammadi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Memory and Neural Computing
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceGesture recognitionGestureSpeech recognitionArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)Spiking neural networkComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the recent surge of significant interest in implementing intelligent hand gesture recognition methods in human-machine interface systems, a wide variety of Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) have been proposed in the literature. In this paper, we introduce a novel and compact Spiking Neural Network (SNN) model for hand gesture recognition using High-Density surface Electromyogram (HD-sEMG) signals. Capitalizing on their ability to extract spatiotemporal features of HD-sEMG signals along with their proven strength in imitating human brain's neural activity using event-driven data processing, we used SNNs as the main building block of our proposed hand gesture recognition model. We show that our proposed model can efficiently differentiate 14 hand movements by considering each sample of the HD-sEMG data as a single time step for the SNN architecture. Moreover, we show that the proposed SNN model does not require huge pre-processing, spike encoding and feature extraction tasks and works effectively on Min-Max normalized continuous-value sEMG signals. We evaluate our SNN model using a 5-fold cross-validation scheme and categorize different participants based on the range of classification accuracy we obtained for them. The following results are acquired by segmenting HD-sEMG signals into windows of size 62.5ms with no overlap. The proposed method led to 6 out of 19 subjects achieving average classification accuracy of ≥ 80% with maximum accuracy of 98% associated with 3rdsession of the sEMG dataset as the test set.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Memory and Neural ComputingFrench-language works237,207