Towards a mobility diagnostic tool: Tracking rollator users' leg pose with a monocular vision system
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive assistance of a rollator (wheeled walker) user tends to reduce the attentional capacity of the user and may impact her stability. Hence, it is important to understand and track the pose of rollator users before augmenting a rollator with some form of cognitive assistance. While the majority of current markerless vision systems focus on estimating 2D and 3D walking motion in the sagittal plane, we wish to estimate the 3D pose of rollator users' lower limbs from observing image sequences in the coronal (frontal) plane. Our apparatus poses a unique set of challenges: a single monocular view of only the lower limbs and a frontal perspective of the rollator user. Since motion in the coronal plane is relatively subtle, we explore multiple cues within a Bayesian probabilistic framework to formulate a posterior estimate for a given subject's leg limbs. In this work, our focus is on evaluating the appearance model (the cues). Preliminary experiments indicate that texture and colour cues conditioned on the appearance of a rollator user outperform more general cues, at the cost of manually initializing the appearance offline.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it