Hand Kinematic Model Construction Based on Tracking Landmarks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual body-tracking techniques have seen widespread adoption in applications such as motion analysis, human–machine interaction, tele-robotics and extended reality (XR). These systems typically provide 2D landmark coordinates corresponding to key limb positions. However, to construct a meaningful 3D kinematic model for body joint reconstruction, a mapping must be established between these visual landmarks and the underlying joint parameters of individual body parts. This paper presents a method for constructing a 3D kinematic model of the human hand using calibrated 2D landmark-tracking data augmented with depth information. The proposed approach builds a hierarchical model in which the palm serves as the root coordinate frame, and finger landmarks are used to compute both forward and inverse kinematic solutions. Through step-by-step examples, we demonstrate how measured hand landmark coordinates are used to define the palm reference frame and solve for joint angles for each finger. These solutions are then used in a visualization framework to qualitatively assess the accuracy of the reconstructed hand motion. As a future work, the proposed model offers a foundation for model-based hand kinematic estimation and has utility in scenarios involving occlusion or missing data. In such cases, the hierarchical structure and kinematic solutions can be used as generative priors in an optimization framework to estimate unobserved landmark positions and joint configurations. The novelty of this work lies in its model-based approach using real sensor data, without relying on wearable devices or synthetic assumptions. Although current validation is qualitative, the framework provides a foundation for future robust estimation under occlusion or sensor noise. It may also serve as a generative prior for optimization-based methods and be quantitatively compared with joint measurements from wearable motion-capture systems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".