MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415360260 · doi:10.59934/jaiea.v5i1.1589

Convolutional Implementation Neural Network (CNN) on the System and Introduction Sign Language to Support Communication with People with Disabilities

2025· article· W4415360260 on OpenAlexaff
Mashandy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicHand Gesture Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkProcess (computing)Sign languageIntersection (aeronautics)Deep learningArtificial neural networkSign (mathematics)Range (aeronautics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The results of this study are based on verifying communication solutions for deaf and hard of hearing participants in Indonesia, the majority of whom use the Indonesian Sign Language System (SIBI). The goal is to design an accurate and efficient system for detecting and recognizing sign language using Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) and accessible in real-time on mobile devices to support more inclusive communication. This study uses a quantitative approach and uses deep learning techniques by utilizing a SIBI image dataset totaling 5,280 images (24 classes without the letters J and Z) with a division of 80% for training data and 20% for validation data. This research process starts from image preprocessing, designing a CNN architecture consisting of convolution, pooling, and fully connected layers, implementing it systematically with Python–TensorFlow, and integrating it into the Flutter application through APIs. Evaluation was conducted using Intersection over Union (IoU) metrics and measured algorithm performance with precision, recall, and mean Average Precision (mAP). The model is capable of achieving a precision of 0.97, a recall of 1.00 and a high mAP in a wide range of backgrounds and lighting.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.884
Threshold uncertainty score0.598

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Artificial Intelligence and Engineering Applications (JAIEA)Same topicHand Gesture Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207