Development of an indoor rowing machine with manual FES controller for total body exercise in paraplegia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concept 2 indoor rowing machine (Concept 2 Inc., USA) was modified for functional electrical stimulation (FES) rowing exercise in paraplegia. A new seating system provides trunk stability and constrains the leg motion to the sagittal plane. A 4-channel electrical stimulator activates the quadriceps and hamstrings in Drive and Recovery phases of the rowing cycle, respectively. Two force-sensing resistors (FSR) on the handle measure the thumb press as the command signal to the electrical stimulator. Optical encoders measure the positions of the seat and handle during rowing. To synchronize the voluntarily controlled upper body movement with the FES controlled leg movement, a novel manual control system was developed. It uses the voluntary thumb presses to control the timing of the stimulation to the paralyzed leg muscles. The manual control system was intuitive and easy to learn and resulted in well-coordinated rowing. Evaluation of the modified rower by paraplegic volunteers showed that it is effective, safe, and affordable exercise alternative for paraplegics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".