MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408429731 · doi:10.1038/s41597-025-04763-w

Electromyographic typing gesture classification dataset for neurotechnological human-machine interfaces

2025· article· en· W4408429731 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Eby, Moshe Beutel, David Koivisto, Idan Achituve, Ethan Fetaya, José Zariffa

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSession (web analytics)Computer scienceTask (project management)ElectromyographyTypingInterface (matter)GestureArtificial intelligenceKey (lock)Machine learningSpeech recognitionHuman–computer interactionPattern recognition (psychology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineEngineeringWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neurotechnological interfaces have the potential to create new forms of human-machine interactions, by allowing devices to interact directly with neurological signals instead of via intermediates such as keystrokes. Surface electromyography (sEMG) has been used extensively in myoelectric control systems, which use bioelectric activity recorded from muscles during contractions to classify actions. This technology has been used primarily for rehabilitation applications. In order to support the development of myoelectric interfaces for a broader range of human-machine interactions, we present an sEMG dataset obtained during key presses in a typing task. This fine-grained classification dataset consists of 16-channel bilateral sEMG recordings and key logs, collected from 19 individuals in two sessions on different days. We report baseline results on intra-session, inter-session and inter-subject evaluations. Our baseline results show that within-session accuracy is relatively high, even with simple learning models. However, the results on between-session and between-participant are much lower, showing that generalizing between sessions and individuals is an open challenge.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.543
Threshold uncertainty score0.496

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207