MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1580344946 · doi:10.1109/bwcca.2014.61

Impact of Sensor Sensitivity in Assistive Environment

2014· article· en· W1580344946 on OpenAlexaff
Kin Fun Li, Ana-Maria Sevcenco, Lei Cheng

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceReliability (semiconductor)Mobile deviceTracking (education)Motion (physics)Match movingAssistive technologyWork (physics)Controller (irrigation)Human–computer interactionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationTelemedicineMotion sensorsSimulationMultimediaHealth careArtificial intelligenceMedicineEngineeringPsychologyOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in motion detection, tracking, and classification have made available many applications in telerehabilition. Monitoring of the elderlies and physically impaired, sports medicine, and physical therapy, are some of the active research areas in telerehabilition. In order to gain acceptance by the general public, a telerehabilition system should have high accuracy in tracking movements and be low in cost. This work investigates the suitability of Leap Motion, a computer input device, for telerehabilition purpose. Its accuracy and tracking reliability are compared to that of Nintendo's Wii Remote Controller (Wiimote) that was studies in our prior work. Wiimote can be used as a handheld device for patients to perform repetitive motions in physical therapy sessions in an autonomous remote setting. The Leap Motion, on the other hand, seems to fit physiotherapy sessions that require free motion without any props. Patients can use such an instructional system at home without the effort and time incurred with visiting a medical office. At the same time, the public health care system also benefits from such devices due to reduced cost and broader delivery of programs.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→