Identification of Time-Varying Intrinsic and Reflex Joint Stiffness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic joint stiffness defines the dynamic relationship between the position of a joint and the torque acting about it and can be separated into intrinsic and reflex components. Under stationary conditions, these can be identified using a nonlinear parallel-cascade algorithm that models intrinsic stiffness-a linear dynamic response to position-and reflex stiffness-a nonlinear dynamic response to velocity-as parallel pathways. Experiments using this method show that both intrinsic and reflex stiffness depend strongly on the operating point, defined by position and torque, likely because of some underlying nonlinear behavior not modeled by the parallel-cascade structure. Consequently, both intrinsic and reflex stiffness will appear to be time-varying whenever the operating point changes rapidly, as during movement. This paper describes and validates an extension of the parallel-cascade algorithm to time-varying conditions. It describes the ensemble method used to estimate time-varying intrinsic and reflex stiffness. Simulation results demonstrate that the algorithm can track rapid changes in joint stiffness accurately. Finally, the performance of the algorithm in the presence of noise is tested. We conclude that the new algorithm is a powerful new tool for the study of joint stiffness during functional tasks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".