Classification-based Segmentation for Rehabilitation Exercise Monitoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Exercise segmentation, the process of isolating individual repetitions from continuous time series measurement of human motion, is key to providing online feedback to patients during rehabilitation and enables the computation of useful metrics such as joint velocity and range of motion that are otherwise difficult to measure in the clinical setting. METHODS: This paper proposes a classifier-based approach, where the motion segmentation problem is formulated as a two-class classification problem, classifying between segment and non-segment points. The proposed approach does not require domain knowledge of the exercises and generalizes to groups of participants and exercises that were not part of the training set, allowing for more robustness in clinical applications. RESULTS: Using only data from healthy participants for training, the proposed algorithm achieves an average segmentation accuracy of 92% on a 30-participant healthy dataset and 87% on a 44-patient rehabilitation dataset. CONCLUSION: A real-time approach for segmentation of rehabilitation exercises is proposed, based on two-class classification approach. The method is validated on both healthy and rehabilitation motion datasets and generalizes to a variety of demographics and exercises not part of the training set.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".