Angular-Velocity Control Approach for Stance-Control Orthoses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, stance-control knee orthoses require external control mechanisms to control knee flexion during stance and allow free knee motion during the swing phase of gait. A new angular-velocity control approach that uses a rotary-hydraulic device to resist knee flexion when the knee angular velocity passes a preset threshold is presented. This angular-velocity approach for orthotic stance control is based on the premise that knee-flexion angular velocity during a knee-collapse event, such as a stumble or fall, is greater than that during walking. The new hydraulic knee-flexion control device does not require an external control mechanism to switch from free motion to stance control mode. Functional test results demonstrated that the hydraulic angular-velocity activated knee joint provided free knee motion during walking, engaged upon knee collapse, and supported body weight while the end-user recovered to a safe body position. The joint was tested to 51.6 Nm in single loading tests and passed 200,000 repeated loading cycles with a peak load of 88 Nm per cycle. The hydraulic, angular velocity activation approach has potential to improve safety and security for people with lower extremity weakness or when recovering from joint trauma.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".