MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2533010734 · doi:10.1109/iembs.2004.1404298

Time-varying parallel-cascade system identification of ankle stiffness from ensemble data

2005· article· en· W2533010734 on OpenAlexaff
M. Baker, Yong Zhao, Daniel Ludvig, R. Wagner, Robert E. Kearney

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEffects of Vibration on Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCascadeControl theory (sociology)System identificationStiffnessImpulse (physics)Computer scienceImpulse responseWhite noiseNoise (video)GaussianJoint stiffnessMathematicsData modelingArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPhysicsStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measurement of joint dynamic stiffness during time-varying conditions is crucial to understand the role of joint mechanics during movement. Stiffness can be separated into intrinsic and reflex components, and are modeled as linear dynamic and Hammerstein systems, respectively. Time-varying identification methods using ensemble data have been developed previously for both pathways and were tested separately on simulated data. In this study, these algorithms were integrated into the time-varying, parallel-cascade identification method. Ankle dynamics were modeled during a ramp input and simulated impulse response functions (IRFs) were generated. Gaussian white noise was low-pass filtered and was convolved with the simulated systems over 500 realizations. The ensemble data was used to evaluate the new identification technique. The mean variances accounted for (VAFs) between the true and identified IRFs for the intrinsic and reflex pathways were 99.9% and 97.7%, respectively, demonstrating the technique's strong ability to predict the system's dynamics.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.289 · 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

Citations8
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEffects of Vibration on HealthFrench-language works237,207