MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120303680 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2004.1345029

An improved method for muscle activation detection during gait

2004· article· en· W2120303680 on OpenAlexafffund
Lanyi Xu, Adam C. Adler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersUniversity of Ottawa
KeywordsComputer scienceElectromyographyReliability (semiconductor)Sensitivity (control systems)HeuristicProcess (computing)ComputationGaitGait analysisArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)SIGNAL (programming language)Speech recognitionMachine learningPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPower (physics)AlgorithmEngineeringElectronic engineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimation of on-off timing of human skeletal muscles during movement based on surface electromyography (EMG) is an important issue in sport performance and health care applications. Several methods have been proposed for detecting the on and off timing of the muscle. However, little is known about the reliability and accuracy of these methods, which frequently rely on intuitive and heuristic criteria. Some sophisticated techniques have been proposed, but have a disadvantage of heavy computational load and therefore are not suitable for real-time online applications. An improved method is proposed based on the double-threshold method of P. Bonato et al. (see IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng., vol.45, p.287-99, 1998). It provides a higher sensitivity for activation detection. In addition, the whitening process of the EMG signal is avoided, significantly reducing the computation time.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations41
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207