Performance evaluation of an algorithm for the identification of time-varying joint stiffness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previously, we described a time-varying, parallel-cascade system identification algorithm that estimates intrinsic and reflex stiffness dynamics. It uses an iterative technique, in conjunction with established, time-varying, identification methods, to estimate the two pathways from ensembles of input and output realizations having the same time-varying behavior. This paper presents the results of a study that systematically evaluated the performance of the algorithm. Simulations were used to determine the algorithm's ability to track rapid changes in dynamic stiffness, and quantify its performance limits. There was close agreement between the simulated and estimated joint stiffness demonstrating that the algorithm estimates stiffness correctly even when it changes rapidly. However, the algorithm's ability to identify the reflex pathway was shown to depend on the relative contributions of the intrinsic and reflex pathways to the overall torque. As the intrinsic contribution to the output grew it became increasingly difficult to identify the reflex pathway accurately. The quality of the reflex identification greatly improved as the number of realizations in the data ensembles increased. More realizations were needed as the signal-to-noise ratio decreased and the relative contribution of the reflex pathway decreased. For good results, under typical time-varying experimental conditions, between 500 and 800 realizations are required.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".