MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177408885 · doi:10.1504/ijamc.2009.026861

Haptic rehabilitation exercises performance evaluation using automated inference systems

2009· article· en· W2177408885 on OpenAlex
Ahmad Barghout, Atif Alamri, Mohamad Eid, Abdulmotaleb El Saddik

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Advanced Media and Communication · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceHaptic technologyConsistency (knowledge bases)Adaptive neuro fuzzy inference systemInferenceInference systemFuzzy inference systemMachine learningRehabilitationArtificial intelligenceFuzzy logicHuman–computer interactionData miningFuzzy control systemMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Haptics and virtual environments offer the opportunity to improve the traditional methods of stroke rehabilitation. Traditionally, a therapist has to subjectively evaluate the patient's performance. This paper aims to introduce an automated inference system that utilises haptic data to quantise the patient's performance. Two systems were implemented: a Fuzzy Inference System (FIS) and an Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS). The two systems were validated with sample input/output datasets. Testing with real subjects' data has led to the conclusion that the CyberForce system is incapable of providing normative data for evaluating the patient performance due to calibration and consistency issues. This is an expanded version of a paper presented at the 3rd IEEE International Workshop on Medical Measurements and Applications, 9?10 May 2008, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

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.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.315 · 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