Motion Normalized Proportional Control for Improved Pattern Recognition-Based Myoelectric Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes two novel proportional control algorithms for use with pattern recognition-based myoelectric control. The systems were designed to provide automatic configuration of motion-specific gains and to normalize the control space to the user's usable dynamic range. Class-specific normalization parameters were calculated using data collected during classifier training and require no additional user action or configuration. The new control schemes were compared to the standard method of deriving proportional control using a one degree of freedom Fitts' law test for each of the wrist flexion/extension, wrist pronation/supination and hand close/open degrees of freedom. Performance was evaluated using the Fitts' law throughput value as well as more descriptive metrics including path efficiency, overshoot, stopping distance and completion rate. The proposed normalization methods significantly outperformed the incumbent method in every performance category for able bodied subjects (p < 0.001) and nearly every category for amputee subjects. Furthermore, one proposed method significantly outperformed both other methods in throughput (p < 0.0001), yielding 21% and 40% improvement over the incumbent method for amputee and able bodied subjects, respectively. The proposed control schemes represent a computationally simple method of fundamentally improving myoelectric control users' ability to elicit robust, and controlled, proportional velocity commands.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".