MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970446753 · doi:10.1109/embc.2012.6346931

Detrending knee joint vibration signals with a cascade moving average filter

2012· article· en· W1970446753 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Suxian Cai, Yunfeng Wu, Ning Xiang, Zhangting Zhong, Jia He, Lei Shi, Fang Xu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Health Monitoring Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsCascadeFilter (signal processing)Knee JointVibrationJoint (building)Computer scienceOperator (biology)Control theory (sociology)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceAcousticsComputer visionEngineeringMedicineStructural engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knee joint vibration signals are very useful for computer-aided analysis of the pathological conditions in the knee. In a vibration arthrometry test, the legs of patients with knee joint disorders may tremble due to the reaction of pain, which causes the baseline wander that may affect the diagnostic decision making in medical study. This paper presents a new type of cascade moving average filter with hierarchical layers to remove the baseline wander in the raw knee joint vibration signals. The first layer of the cascade filter contains two moving averaging operators with the same order. The five tail inputs of the first moving averaging operator are overlapping with the beginning inputs of the successive operator. The piecewise linear trends estimated by the moving average operators in the first layer were smoothed in the final cascade filter output. The simulation results showed that the cascade filter can effectively remove the baseline wander in the raw knee joint vibration signals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations38
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStructural Health Monitoring TechniquesFrench-language works237,207