Admittance-Based Voluntary-Driven Motion With Speed-Controlled Tremor Rejection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the elderly, there have been reports of above 10% of the population being diagnosed with pathological tremor. Some patients find the conventional medical solutions, which primarily include medications and surgery, insufficient to treat their conditions. Technologies to mechanically suppress tremor have been proposed as a potential alternative. Robotic solutions for suppressing human tremor typically revolve around identifying and isolating the tremor motion component. This study proposes instead to only estimate the intentional movement and reject any disturbance that interferes with such an intended movement. By designing the control feedback such that motions other than the voluntary are rejected, the tremor component is attenuated. The controller components include an outer-loop admittance feedback loop and an internal velocity feedback loop. Additionally, a state feedback is utilized to improve the velocity tracking. To test the proposed approach, a benchtop tremor simulation device (TSD) was developed. The TSD consists of two motors, which, respectively, simulate the motion of a human joint and the suppressing action of a mechanical suppression system. A parametric stability analysis of the proposed tremor-suppression strategy is presented. A motion profile recorded from a person with tremor is used as human input in the TSD to experimentally validate the proposed tremor rejection strategy. Spectral analysis results show a 99.8% tremor reduction; the power reduction related to the voluntary movement is instead negligible (0.18%). Tracking of a velocity profile results in a small root-mean-square (rms) error (0.58 rad/s). The paper concludes by comparing the proposed approach to others presented in the literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".