MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124517686 · doi:10.1109/7333.928571

A reliable gait phase detection system

2001· article· en· W2124517686 on OpenAlexaff
I. Pappas, Miloš R. Popović, Thierry Keller, Volker Dietz, Manfred Morari

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGaitStairsEffect of gait parameters on energetic costGait analysisHeelSimulationComputer scienceSittingExoskeletonPreferred walking speedPhysical medicine and rehabilitationStair climbingEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new highly reliable gait phase detection system, which can be used in gait analysis applications and to control the gait cycle of a neuroprosthesis for walking, is described. The system was designed to detect in real-time the following gait phases: stance, heel-off, swing, and heel-strike. The gait phase detection system employed a gyroscope to measure the angular velocity of the foot and three force sensitive resistors to assess the forces exerted by the foot on the shoe sole during walking. A rule-based detection algorithm, which was running on a portable microprocessor board, processed the sensor signals. In the presented experimental study ten able body subjects and six subjects with impaired gait tested the device in both indoor and outdoor environments (0-25 degrees C). The subjects were asked to walk on flat and irregular surfaces, to step over small obstacles, to walk on inclined surfaces, and to ascend and descend stairs. Despite the significant variation in the individual walking styles the system achieved an overall detection reliability above 99% for both subject groups for the tasks involving walking on flat, irregular, and inclined surfaces. In the case of stair climbing and descending tasks the success rate of the system was above 99% for the able body subjects and above 96 % for the subjects with impaired gait. The experiments also showed that the gait phase detection system, unlike other similar devices, was insensitive to perturbations caused by nonwalking activities such as weight shifting between legs during standing, feet sliding, sitting down, and standing up.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.004

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations488
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207