MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002011710 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2011.6091546

Gait analysis with multiple depth cameras

2011· article· en· W2002011710 on OpenAlexafffund
Edouard Auvinet, Franck Multon, Jean Meunier

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesAssociation Nationale de la Recherche et de la Technologie
KeywordsGaitComputer scienceGait analysisComputer visionTreadmillHeelArtificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineAnatomyPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The gait movement seems simple at first glance, but in reality it is a very complex neural and biomechanical process. In particular, if a person is affected by a disease or an injury, the gait may be modified. To help detecting such change, we propose a new method based on multiple depth cameras. The aim of this paper is to show the possibility to reconstruct the body 3D volume in real time during gait in order to detect a pathological problem related to this movement and eventually improve diagnosis. Preliminary results showed that the system is sensitive to gait change produced by a heel prosthesis (heel cup) inserted in one shoe of subjects walking on a treadmill. The system detected a difference between maximal forward and backward positions of lower limbs for this pathological walk, a difference that was negligible for normal walk. These promising results were obtained with only 3 low cost depth cameras; we therefore believe that such methodology opens a new and affordable way for 3D volumetric gait analysis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207