MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109257445 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2006.870220

Fatigue Estimation With a Multivariable Myoelectric Mapping Function

2006· article· en· W2109257445 on OpenAlexaff
Dawn MacIsaac, P.A. Parker, Kevin Englehart, Daniel R. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrequency domainMuscle fatigueNoise (video)Random noiseArtificial neural networkSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Signal processingElectromyographyPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsComputer scienceStatisticsArtificial intelligenceMedicineComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel approach to muscle fatigue assessment is proposed. A function is used to map multiple myoelectric parameters representing segments of myoelectric data to a fatigue estimate for that segment. An artificial neural network is used to tune the mapping function and time-domain features are used as inputs. Two fatigue tests were conducted on five participants in each of static, cyclic and random conditions. The function was tuned with one data set and tested on the other. Performance was evaluated based on a signal to noise metric which compared variability due to fatigue factors with variability due to nonfatiguing factors. Signal to noise ratios for the mapping function ranged from 7.89 under random conditions to 9.69 under static conditions compared to 3.34-6.74 for mean frequency and 2.12-2.63 for instantaneous mean frequency indicating that the mapping function tracks the myoelectric manifestations of fatigue better than either mean frequency or instantaneous mean frequency under all three contraction conditions.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations49
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207