Center of Mass Acceleration Feedback Control of Standing Balance by Functional Neuromuscular Stimulation Against External Postural Perturbations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the use of center of mass (COM) acceleration feedback for improving performance of a functional neuromuscular stimulation control system to restore standing function to a subject with complete, thoracic-level spinal cord injury. The approach for linearly relating changes in muscle stimulation to changes in COM acceleration was verified experimentally and subsequently produced data to create an input-output map driven by sensor feedback. The feedback gains were systematically tuned to reduce upper extremity (UE) loads applied to an instrumented support device while resisting external postural disturbances. Total body COM acceleration was accurately estimated (>89% variance explained) using 3-D outputs of two accelerometers mounted on the pelvis and torso. Compared to constant muscle stimulation employed clinically, feedback control of stimulation reduced UE loading by 33%. COM acceleration feedback is advantageous in constructing a standing neuroprosthesis since it provides the basis for a comprehensive control synergy about a global, dynamic variable and requires minimal instrumentation. Future work should include tuning and testing the feedback control system during functional reaching activity that is more indicative of activities of daily living.
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".