MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2166293833 · doi:10.1109/aim.2010.5695802

Ambulatory walking speed estimation under different step lengths and frequencies

2010· article· en· W2166293833 on OpenAlexaff
Shuozhi Yang, Qingguo Li

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInertial measurement unitMean squared errorPreferred walking speedLength measurementAccelerometerTreadmillComputer scienceMathematicsRange (aeronautics)SimulationControl theory (sociology)StatisticsEngineeringArtificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study we investigated the feasibility and performance of estimating walking speed under different combinations of step length and step frequency using a shank-mounted inertial measurement unit (IMU). The estimation algorithm is based on the fact that the walking is a cyclical motion with a distinguishable pattern and an inverted pendulum-like behavior. To evaluate its performance under different walking conditions, treadmill trials were conducted with controlled step lengths and step frequencies. A root mean squared error (RMSE) of 5.6% was achieved in the walking speed estimation across all combinations of step length and step frequency. As the shank-mounted IMU walking speed estimation method showed a robust performance at wide range of step lengths and step frequencies, it could potentially be used as a low-cost alternative for walking speed measurement in a non-laboratory environment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→