A Novel Biomechanical Model-Aided IMU/UWB Fusion for Magnetometer-Free Lower Body Motion Capture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The available human body inertial motion capture (MoCap) systems are aided by magnetometers to remove the drift error in yaw angle estimation, which in turn limits their application in the presence of long-lasting magnetic disturbances in indoor environments. This paper introduces a magnetometer-free algorithm for lower-body MoCap including 3-D localization and posture tracking by fusing inertial sensors with an ultrawideband (UWB) localization system and a biomechanical model of the human lower body. Using our novel Kalman filter-based fusion algorithm, the UWB localization data aided by the biomechanical model can eliminate the drift in inertial yaw angle estimation of the lower-body segments. This magnetometer-free yaw angle estimation makes the algorithm insensitive to the magnetic disturbances. The algorithm is benchmarked against the optical MoCap system for various indoor activities including walking, jogging, jumping, and stairs ascending/descending. The results show that the proposed algorithm outperforms the available magnetometer-aided algorithms in yaw angle tracking under magnetic disturbances. In a uniform magnetic field, the algorithm shows similar accuracies in localization and joint angle tracking when compared with the magnetometer-aided methods. The localization accuracy of the proposed method is better than 4.5 cm in a 3-D space and its accuracy for knee angle tracking is about 3.5° and 4.5° in low and high dynamic motions, respectively.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".