MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Activity classification in persons with stroke based on frequency features

2015· article· en· W2091106212 on OpenAlexafffund
Annemarie F. Laudanski, Brenda Brouwer, Qingguo Li

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Engineering & Physics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsAccelerometerStairsGyroscopeGaitArtificial intelligenceComputer sciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationGait analysisStair climbingRehabilitationPattern recognition (psychology)MedicinePhysical therapyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent advances in the use of inertial measurement units (IMUs) for motion analysis suggest the possibility of using this technology for the monitoring of daily activities of individuals during rehabilitation post-stroke. Previous studies have utilized features extracted from accelerometer and gyroscope signals to develop classification models capable of identifying activities performed within large datasets. In this study, nine k-nearest neighbor cross-validated classifiers were developed using frequency-features derived from shank-mounted IMUs on the less-affected and affected limbs of subjects with stroke. These classifiers were evaluated for two separate datasets of post-stroke gait; the first a classification of three separate gait activities (overground walking, stair ascent, and stair descent), and the second a classification of five gait activities, overground walking, stair ascent, and descent with a distinction between stepping pattern used while negotiating stairs (step-over-step (SOS) and step-by-step (SBS)). The comparison showed the highest classification accuracy, 100% for the three-activities and 94% for the five-activities, was obtained using a classifier composed of features derived from accelerometer and gyroscope measurements from both IMUs on less-affected and affected limbs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Engineering & PhysicsSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207