MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1501521769 · doi:10.1109/kst.2015.7149601

A robust measure of probability density function of various noises in electromyography (EMG) signal acquisition

2015· article· en· W1501521769 on OpenAlexaff
Sirinee Thongpanja, Angkoon Phinyomark, Chusak Limsakul, Pornchai Phukpattaranont

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectromyographyMeasure (data warehouse)Probability density functionSIGNAL (programming language)Computer scienceNoise (video)Function (biology)Speech recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsStatisticsData miningPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Statistical methods for estimating a probability density function (PDF) of surface electromyography (EMG) signals during upper-limb motions have been investigated in previous studies to select the suitable feature extraction methods for multifunction myoelectric control systems. While these methods have achieved a good performance in estimating PDF of EMG signals from different motions and muscles, no prior studies have evaluated the performance of these methods to estimate the PDF of noises in EMG signal acquisition. The utility of these methods consisting of bicoherence, kurtosis, negentropy, and L-kurtosis, was investigated in estimating the PDF of five different noise types: the single and many spurious background spikes, white Gaussian noise, motion artifact, and power line interference. The results show that the L-kurtosis can identify the PDF of all studied noises in EMG signal acquisition correctly. In contrast, other estimating methods are inaccuracy in at least one noise type.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→