MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adaptive fuzzy <i>k</i> -NN classifier for EMG signal decomposition

2006· article· en· W2060915658 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Engineering & Physics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPattern recognition (psychology)Classifier (UML)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceWord error rateMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An adaptive fuzzy k-nearest neighbour classifier (AFNNC) for EMG signal decomposition is presented and evaluated. The developed classifier uses an adaptive assertion-based classification approach for setting a minimum classification threshold. The similarity criterion used for grouping motor unit potentials (MUPs) is based on a combination of MUP shapes and two modes of use of motor unit firing pattern information: passive and active. The performance of the developed classifier was evaluated using synthetic signals with specific properties and experimental signals and compared with the performance of an adaptive template matching classifier, the adaptive certainty classifier (ACC). Across the sets of simulated and experimental EMG signals used for comparison, the AFNNC had better average classification performance overall, but due to the assignment of higher numbers of MUPs it made relatively more errors. Nonetheless, these increased error rates would still be acceptable for most clinical uses of decomposed EMG data. An independent and a related set of simulated signals were used for testing. For the independent simulated signals of varying intensity, the AFNNC had on average an improved correct classification rate (CCr) (8.1%) but an increased error rate (Er) (1.5%) compared to ACC. For the related simulated signals with varying amounts of shape and/or firing pattern variability, the AFNNC on average had an improved CCr (5%) but a slightly increased Er (0.3%) compared to ACC. For experimental signals, the AFNNC on average had improved CCr (6%) but an increased Er (2.1%) compared to ACC. The greatest gains in AFNNC performance relative to that of the ACC occurred when the variability of MUP shapes within motor unit potential trains was high suggesting that compared to a template matching assignment strategy the NN assignment paradigm is better able to ameliorate the classification problems caused by MUP instability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.778

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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