T.120 application sharing for the remote configuration of prostheses
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
We conducted a study to determine whether application sharing and desktop videoconferencing using the Internet constituted a viable method for remotely configuring a microprocessor-controlled lower-extremity prosthesis. A DSL broadband connection (operated at 256 kbit/s) was used to connect two prosthetic care facilities over the public Internet. PC-based videoconferencing was used with application sharing for the remote configuration of the prosthesis and to view information on the load and angle of the prosthetic knee. Fifteen people with trans-femoral amputations had the settings for their prosthesis scrambled before a specialist at another site remotely configured the device. There were no significant differences between the original and online settings. Clinicians at both sites considered that 14 out of 15 sessions were successful (one trial involved technical problems with the knee unit that were unrelated to the telemedicine trial). The clients rated their satisfaction with the technique as excellent (47%), above average (33%) or average (20%). The present study shows that a combination of desktop videoconferencing and T.120 application sharing can be used for the remote configuration of assistive devices.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it