MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090771768 · doi:10.1109/tro.2014.2361937

Virtual Constraint Control of a Powered Prosthetic Leg: From Simulation to Experiments With Transfemoral Amputees

2014· article· en· W2090771768 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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Robotics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentU.S. Army Medical Research Acquisition ActivityNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Robustness (evolution)GaitRobotComputer scienceFeedback linearizationConstraint (computer-aided design)LinearizationInverted pendulumControl (management)Control engineeringSimulationEngineeringArtificial intelligenceNonlinear systemPhysical medicine and rehabilitation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent powered (or robotic) prosthetic legs independently control different joints and time periods of the gait cycle, resulting in control parameters and switching rules that can be difficult to tune by clinicians. This challenge might be addressed by a unifying control model used by recent bipedal robots, in which virtual constraints define joint patterns as functions of a monotonic variable that continuously represents the gait cycle phase. In the first application of virtual constraints to amputee locomotion, this paper derives exact and approximate control laws for a partial feedback linearization to enforce virtual constraints on a prosthetic leg. We then encode a human-inspired invariance property called effective shape into virtual constraints for the stance period. After simulating the robustness of the partial feedback linearization to clinically meaningful conditions, we experimentally implement this control strategy on a powered transfemoral leg. We report the results of three amputee subjects walking overground and at variable cadences on a treadmill, demonstrating the clinical viability of this novel control approach.

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 score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.820

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · 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