MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2535624273 · doi:10.1109/embc.2016.7592195

Surrogate analysis of fractal dimensions from SEMG sensor array as a predictor of chronic low back pain

2016· article· en· W2535624273 on OpenAlexaff
Manouane Caza-Szoka, Daniel Massicotte, François Nougarou, Martin Descarreaux

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFractalFractal dimensionNonlinear systemFast Fourier transformSurrogate dataFractal analysisArtificial neural networkPattern recognition (psychology)SIGNAL (programming language)Computer scienceDimension (graph theory)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsAlgorithmPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a method based on nonlinear analysis of sEMG sensor array signals (2 arrays of 5×13 sensors) to detect chronic low back pain is presented. The use of an FFT based surrogate analysis method isolates the nonlinear structure of the signals from the effect of the power spectrum. The fractal dimension is used for the nonlinear characteristic. From the sensor arrays, a certain number of channels which exhibits the most nonlinearity for a subject are kept as input of a small neural network. A leave-one-out type cross-validation method shows a success rate of 80%.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.367
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0120.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic ControlFrench-language works237,207