A multi-modal approach for hand motion classification using surface EMG and accelerometers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For decades, electromyography (EMG) has been used for diagnostics, upper-limb prosthesis control, and recently even for more general human-machine interfaces. Current commercial upper limb prostheses usually have only two electrode sites due to cost and space limitations, while researchers often experiment with multiple sites. Micro-machined inertial sensors are gaining popularity in many commercial and research applications where knowledge of the postures and movements of the body is desired. In the present study, we have investigated whether accelerometers, which are relatively cheap, small, robust to noise, and easily integrated in a prosthetic socket; can reduce the need for adding more electrode sites to the prosthesis control system. This was done by adding accelerometers to a multifunction system and also to a simplified system more similar to current commercially available prosthesis controllers, and assessing the resulting changes in classification accuracy. The accelerometer does not provide information on muscle force like EMG electrodes, but the results show that it provides useful supplementary information. Specifically, if one wants to improve a two-site EMG system, one should add an accelerometer affixed to the forearm rather than a third electrode.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".