MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Experimental and modelling investigation of surface EMG spike analysis

2010· article· en· W2029916594 on OpenAlexaff
David A. Gabriel, Anita Christie, James Inglis, Gary Kamen

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Engineering & Physics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotor unitSpike (software development)Isometric exerciseElectromyographyPattern recognition (psychology)Independent component analysisMathematicsAmplitudeBicepsSensitivity (control systems)Computer scienceBiomedical engineeringAcousticsArtificial intelligencePhysicsEngineeringElectronic engineeringPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A pattern classification method based on five measures extracted from the surface electromyographic (sEMG) signal is used to provide a unique characterization of the interference pattern for different motor unit behaviours. This study investigated the sensitivity of the five sEMG measures during the force gradation process. Tissue and electrode filtering effects were further evaluated using a sEMG model. Subjects (N=8) performed isometric elbow flexion contractions from 0 to 100% MVC. The sEMG signals from the biceps brachii were recorded simultaneously with force. The basic building block of the sEMG model was the detection of single fibre action potentials (SFAPs) through a homogeneous, equivalent isotropic, infinite volume conduction medium. The SFAPs were summed to generate single motor unit action potentials. The physiologic properties from a well-known muscle model and motor unit recruitment and firing rate schemes were combined to generate synthetic sEMG signals. The following pattern classification measures were calculated: mean spike amplitude, mean spike frequency, mean spike slope, mean spike duration, and the mean number of peaks per spike. Root-mean-square amplitude and mean power frequency were also calculated. Taken together, the experimental data and modelling analysis showed that below 50% MVC, the pattern classification measures were more sensitive to changes in force than traditional time and frequency measures. However, there are additional limitations associated with electrode distance from the source that must be explored further. Future experimental work should ensure that the inter-electrode distance is no greater than 1cm to mitigate the effects of tissue filtering.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Engineering & PhysicsSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207