An Orientation Estimator for the Wheelchair's Caster Wheels
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wheelchair ergometers are a highly valuable tool in the study of the biomechanics of manual wheelchair propulsion. However, current ergometers have some drawbacks that affect their level of realism. For example, the moment of inertia of the wheelchair-user system and the caster wheels' orientation are usually neglected, despite their high influence on the wheelchair's behavior. Taking these factors into account requires a complex dynamic model, and the calibration of such a model requires on-the-field recordings of the caster wheels' orientation, which are currently difficult to obtain. In this paper, we have proposed an open-loop observer that estimates each caster wheel's orientation (CWO) based only on the rear wheels' kinematics. The model was validated by propelling the wheelchair on three different floors (vinyl, carpet, and concrete) with five different normal forces between the caster wheels and the ground. Comparison between the estimated CWO and a reference one recorded by an optoelectronic device gave an accuracy error of less than ±8°. This error reduced to ±5° when the wheelchair was propelled following straight or slightly curved patterns. This observer has implications in the design of better wheelchair ergometers and simulators, as well as in the control of electric wheelchairs.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it