MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2150161667 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2011.6030564

Automatic validation of motor unit potential trains extracted by EMG signal decomposition

2011· article· en· W2150161667 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Parsaei, Daniel W. Stashuk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotor unitConsistency (knowledge bases)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)Artificial intelligenceDecompositionAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel method is proposed to assess the validity of motor unit potential trains (MUPTs) obtained during electromyographic (EMG) signal decomposition. The algorithm evaluates a MUPT in terms of motor unit potential (MUP) shape homogeneity, motor unit (MU) firing pattern consistency, and the estimated level of false classification errors in the MUPT. Performance metrics based on simulated EMG signals showed high accuracy for detecting invalid MUPT, similar to those expected to be created by a decomposition algorithm (>;93%), as well as valid MUPTs (98%). Compared to methods that evaluate only MUP shape consistency, the presented methods improved accuracy by 57.6% for detecting invalid MUPTs composed of MUPTs with similar-shaped MUP templates. For invalid sparse MUPTs, the accuracy of the presented method was 40% higher than that of the methods that use only MU firing pattern information.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→