MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109927693 · doi:10.1109/fgr.2006.11

A Layered Deformable Model for Gait Analysis

2006· article· en· W2109927693 on OpenAlexafffund
Haiping Lu, Konstantinos N. Plataniotis, A.N. Venetsanopoulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGait Recognition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoBell (Canada)
FundersUniversity of TorontoUniversity of South Florida
KeywordsGaitComputer visionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGround truthJoint (building)Gait analysisPosition (finance)Ground reaction forceMotion captureKinematicsMotion (physics)EngineeringPhysicsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a layered deformable model (LDM) is proposed for human body pose recovery in gait analysis. This model is inspired by the manually labeled silhouettes in (Z. Liu, et al., July 2004) and it is designed to closely match them. For fronto-parallel gait, the introduced LDM model defines the body part widths and lengths, the position and the joint angles of human body using 22 parameters. The model consists of four layers and allows for limb deformation. With this model, our objective is to recover its parameters (and thus the human body pose) from automatically extracted silhouettes. LDM recovery algorithm is first developed for manual silhouettes, in order to generate ground truth sequences for comparison and useful statistics regarding the LDM parameters. It is then extended for automatically extracted silhouettes. The proposed methodologies have been tested on 10005 frames from 285 gait sequences captured under various conditions and an average error rate of 7% is achieved for the lower limb joint angles of all the frames, showing great potential for model-based gait recognition

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations34
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGait Recognition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207