MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144357419 · doi:10.1109/10.844217

Adaptive whitening of the electromyogram to improve amplitude estimation

2000· article· en· W2144357419 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité LavalRice UniversityU.S. Air ForcePrinceton UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAmplitudeComputer scienceEstimationElectromyographySpeech recognitionElectronic engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous research showed that whitening the surface electromyogram (EMG) can improve EMG amplitude estimation (where EMG amplitude is defined as the time-varying standard deviation of the EMG). However, conventional whitening via a linear filter seems to fail at low EMG amplitude levels, perhaps due to additive background noise in the measured EMG. This paper describes an adaptive whitening technique that overcomes this problem by cascading a nonadaptive whitening filter, an adaptive Wiener filter, and an adaptive gain correction. These stages can be calibrated from two, five second duration, constant-angle, constant-force contractions, one at a reference level [e.g., 50% maximum voluntary contraction (MVC)] and one at 0% MVC. In experimental studies, subjects used real-time EMG amplitude estimates to track a uniform-density, band-limited random target. With a 0.25-Hz bandwidth target, either adaptive whitening or multiple-channel processing reduced the tracking error roughly half-way to the error achieved using the dynamometer signal as the feedback. At the 1.00-Hz bandwidth, all of the EMG processors had errors equivalent to that of the dynamometer signal, reflecting that errors in this task were dominated by subjects' inability to track targets at this bandwidth. Increases in the additive noise level, smoothing window length, and tracking bandwidth diminish the advantages of whitening.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.192 · 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