MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391505210 · doi:10.1145/3643513

Exploring Uni-manual Around Ear Off-Device Gestures for Earables

2024· article· en· W4391505210 on OpenAlexaff
Shaikh Shawon Arefin Shimon, Ali Neshati, Junwei Sun, Qiang Xu, Jian Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsHuawei Technologies (Canada)Ontario Tech UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGestureSwIPeComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionGesture recognitionVocabularyInteraction techniqueWearable computerArtificial intelligenceLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small form factor limits physical input space in earable (i.e., ear-mounted wearable) devices. Off-device earable inputs in alternate mid-air and on-skin around-ear interaction spaces using uni-manual gestures can address this input space limitation. Segmenting these alternate interaction spaces to create multiple gesture regions for reusing off-device gestures can expand earable input vocabulary by a large margin. Although prior earable interaction research has explored off-device gesture preferences and recognition techniques in such interaction spaces, supporting gesture reuse over multiple gesture regions needs further exploration. We collected and analyzed 7560 uni-manual gesture motion data from 18 participants to explore earable gesture reuse by segmentation of on-skin and mid-air spaces around the ear. Our results show that gesture performance degrades significantly beyond 3 mid-air and 5 on-skin around-ear gesture regions for different uni-manual gesture classes (e.g., swipe, pinch, tap). We also present qualitative findings on most and least preferred regions (and associated boundaries) by end-users for different uni-manual gesture shapes across both interaction spaces for earable devices. Our results complement earlier elicitation studies and interaction technologies for earables to help expand the gestural input vocabulary and potentially drive future commercialization of such devices.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous TechnologiesSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207