MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162249689 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2011.2113184

Identification of Time-Varying Intrinsic and Reflex Joint Stiffness

2011· article· en· W2162249689 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel Ludvig, Tanya Starret Visser, Heidi Irene. Giesbrecht, Robert E. Kearney

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)StiffnessCascadeTorqueNonlinear systemJoint stiffnessReflexPosition (finance)Joint (building)Computer scienceMathematicsEngineeringPhysicsStructural engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 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

Citations58
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207