MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2561740778 · doi:10.82308/48151

Identification of ankle joint stiffness using subspace methods

2010· dissertation· en· W2561740778 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsJoint (building)Identification (biology)AnkleComputer scienceOrthodonticsMedicineStructural engineeringEngineeringAnatomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L'étude de la rigidité articulaire en réponse à une charge est un problème difficile car les couples réflexes et intrinsèques ne peuvent pas être mesurés séparément expérimentalement. En outre, la rigidité articulaire opère en boucle fermée car le couple de la cheville est réinjectée à travers la charge pour modifier la position de la cheville. Dans cette thèse, un modèle d'espace d'état pour la rigidité articulaire de la cheville est développé. Une méthode sous-espace à temps discret est ensuite utilisée pour estimer ce modèle d'espace d'état pour la rigidité globale. En considérant les variables instrumentales appropriées, la méthode sous-espace permet d'estimer le modèle espace d'état pour la rigidité articulaire en boucles ouverte et fermée. Cette thèse présente également une méthode sous-espace pour identifier les modèles d'espace d'état pour les systèmes biomédicauxou les systèmes variant dans le temps caractérisés par des phénomènes transitoires de courte durée. Les simulations et les résultats expérimentaux démontrent que ces algorithmes fournissent des estimations précises en fonction de leurs conditions propres.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207