MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155739980 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2009.5334973

Dynamic control of a moving platform using the CAREN system to optimize walking invirtual reality environments

2009· article· en· W2155739980 on OpenAlexaff
Hassan El Makssoud, Carol L. Richards, François Comeau

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Canadian institutionsCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVirtual realityTreadmillComputer scienceGaitPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSimulationPreferred walking speedTrunkTerrainHuman–computer interactionRobotDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)RehabilitationArtificial intelligencePhysical therapyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Virtual reality (VR) technology offers the opportunity to expose patients to complex physical environments without physical danger and thus provides a wide range of opportunities for locomotor training or the study of human postural and walking behavior. A VR-based locomotor training system has been developed for gait rehabilitation post-stroke. A clinical study has shown that persons after stroke are able to adapt and benefit from this novel system wherein they walk into virtual environments (VEs) on a self-paced treadmill mounted on a platform with 6 degrees of freedom. This platform is programmed to mimic changes in the terrain encountered in the VEs. While engaging in these VEs, excessive trunk movements and speed alterations have been observed, especially during the pitch perturbations accompanying uphill or downhill terrain changes. An in-depth study of the subject's behavior in relation to the platform movements revealed that the platform rotational axes need to be modified, as previously shown by Barton et al, and in addition did not consider the subject's position on the treadmill. The aim of this study was to determine an optimal solution to simulate walking in real life when engaging in VEs.

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 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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score0.363

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsFrench-language works237,207