Myoelectric Control for Adaptable Biomechanical Energy Harvesting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have designed and tested a myoelectric controller that automatically adapts energy harvesting from the motion of leg joints to match the power available in different walking conditions. To assist muscles in performing negative mechanical work, the controller engages power generation only when estimated joint mechanical power is negative. When engaged, the controller scales its resistive torque in proportion to estimated joint torque, thereby automatically scaling electrical power generation in proportion to the available mechanical power. To produce real-time estimates of joint torque and mechanical power, the controller leverages a simple model that predicts these variables from measured muscle activity and joint angular velocity. We first tested the model using available literature data for a range of walking speeds and found that estimates of knee joint torque and power well match the corresponding literature profiles (torque R(2): 0.73-0.92; power R(2): 0.60-0.94). We then used human subject experiments to test the performance of the entire controller. Over a range of steady state walking speeds and inclines, as well as a number of non-steady state walking conditions, the myoelectric controller accurately identified when the knee generated negative mechanical power, and automatically adjusted the magnitude of electrical power generation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".