A robot-based surveillance system for recognising distress hand signal
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
Abstract Unfortunately, there are still cases of domestic violence or situations where it is necessary to call for help without arousing the suspicion of the aggressor. In these situations, the help signal devised by the Canadian Women’s Foundation has proven to be effective in reporting a risky situation. By displaying a sequence of hand signals, it is possible to report that help is needed. This work presents a vision-based system that detects this sequence and implements it in a social robot, so that it can automatically identify unwanted situations and alert the authorities. The gesture recognition pipeline presented in this work is integrated into a cognitive architecture used to generate behaviours in robots. In this way, the robot interacts with humans and is able to detect if a person is calling for help. In that case, the robot will act accordingly without alerting the aggressor. The proposed vision system uses the MediaPipe library to detect people in an image and locate the hands, from which it extracts a set of hand landmarks that identify which gesture is being made. By analysing the sequence of detected gestures, it can identify whether a person is performing the distress hand signal with an accuracy of 96.43%.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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