MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2475107902 · doi:10.1109/embsisc.2016.7508620

Review and analysis of recent development of lower extremity exoskeletons for walking assist

2016· article· en· W2475107902 on OpenAlex
Zlatko Lovrenovic, Marc Doumit

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.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExoskeletonComputer scienceVariety (cybernetics)Work (physics)EngineeringSimulationMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The past decades marked a significant progress in the development of exoskeletons in research and in industry. The increasing use of exoskeletons in a variety of fields is a testimony to the advancements made by this class of human mobility assistive devices. The following paper provides a review of current development in lower extremity exoskeletons that deliver walking assistance. The paper focuses on exoskeletons that work in parallel with user's legs. The paper categorizes such exoskeletons into two groups: powered and passive exoskeletons. For each category, most common exoskeletons are revealed. For each given example, a detailed description and analysis of the mechanical design, actuation, control scheme and distinguishable features is presented. The paper concludes with a discussion on the challenges and future directions associated with the creation of these mechanical devices.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Quick stats

Citations30
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207