Marker-based classification of young–elderly gait pattern differences via direct PCA feature extraction and SVMs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The classification of gait patterns has great potential as a diagnostic tool, for example, for the diagnosis of injury or to identify at-risk gait in the elderly. The purpose of the paper is to present a method for classifying group differences in gait pattern by using the complete spatial and temporal information of the segment motion quantified by the markers. The classification rates that are obtained are compared with previous studies using conventional classification features. For our analysis, 37 three-dimensional marker trajectories were collected from each of our 24 young and 24 elderly female subjects while they were walking on a treadmill. Principal component analysis was carried out on these trajectories to retain the spatial and temporal information in the markers. Using a Support Vector Machine with a linear kernel, a classification rate of 95.8% was obtained. This classification approach also allowed visualisation of the contribution of individual markers to group differentiation in position and time. The approach made no specific assumptions and did not require prior knowledge of specific time points in the gait cycle. It is therefore directly applicable for group classification tasks in any study involving marker measurements.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".