MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2472573003

[Recognition of walking stance phase and swing phase based on moving window].

2014· article· en· W2472573003 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Xiaobo Geng, Peng Yang, Xinran Wang, Yanli Geng, Yu Han

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwingSIGNAL (programming language)Computer scienceElectromyographyPhase (matter)Window (computing)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionSpeech recognitionControl theory (sociology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPattern recognition (psychology)SimulationAcousticsControl (management)PhysicsMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wearing transfemoral prosthesis is the only way to complete daily physical activity for amputees. Motion pattern recognition is important for the control of prosthesis, especially in the recognizing swing phase and stance phase. In this paper, it is reported that surface electromyography (sEMG) signal is used in swing and stance phase recognition. sEMG signal of related muscles was sampled by Infiniti of a Canadian company. The sEMG signal was then filtered by weighted filtering window and analyzed by height permitted window. The starting time of stance phase and swing phase is determined through analyzing special muscles. The sEMG signal of rectus femoris was used in stance phase recognition and sEMG signal of tibialis anterior is used in swing phase recognition. In a certain tolerating range, the double windows theory, including weighted filtering window and height permitted window, can reach a high accuracy rate. Through experiments, the real walking consciousness of the people was reflected by sEMG signal of related muscles. Using related muscles to recognize swing and stance phase is reachable. The theory used in this paper is useful for analyzing sEMG signal and actual prosthesis control.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMed→Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→