NICER: A New and Improved Consumed Endurance and Recovery Metric to Quantify Muscle Fatigue of Mid-Air Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural gestures are crucial for mid-air interaction, but predicting and managing muscle fatigue is challenging. Existing torque-based models are limited in their ability to model above-shoulder interactions and to account for fatigue recovery. We introduce a new hybrid model, NICER , which combines a torque-based approach with a new term derived from the empirical measurement of muscle contraction and a recovery factor to account for decreasing fatigue during rest. We evaluated NICER in a mid-air selection task using two interaction methods with different degrees of perceived fatigue. Results show that NICER can accurately model above-shoulder interactions as well as reflect fatigue recovery during rest periods. Moreover, both interaction methods show a stronger correlation with subjective fatigue measurement ( ρ = 0.978/0.976) than a previous model, Cumulative Fatigue ( ρ = 0.966/0.923), confirming that NICER is a powerful analytical tool to predict fatigue across a variety of gesture-based interactive applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".