MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2791666356

An Adaptive Classification Methodology for Myoelectrically Controlled Prostheses

2005· article· en· W2791666356 on OpenAlexaff
A. W. Plumb, Adrian D. C. Chan, Aarti R. Goge

Bibliographic record

VenueCMBES Proceedings · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassifier (UML)RetrainingArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceQuadratic classifierPattern recognition (psychology)Training setMargin classifierLinear discriminant analysisFeature vectorMachine learning
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Myoelectric signals (MES) have proven to be effective inputs to control systems of powered prosthetic devices. A number of output motions can be derived from the MES monitored from multiple control sites by employing pattern recognition techniques; however, MES measurement conditions will change over time, causing increased signal variation from the training data, making initial training data inadequate classification exemplars. To create a dynamically adaptable system, a classifier that undergoes continuous online training was developed. This classifier validates decisions and uses valid feature vectors for retraining, with classification decisions as classifier targets. Validation utilizes a retraining buffer to find 64 consecutive and identical majority vote decisions. The use of a large buffer ensures a higher confidence that the class decisions are correct. Every 8^th feature vector from the buffer is incorporated into the training set, discarding older feature vectors to maintain a constant number of training exemplars. Retraining the classifier with this new training set allows the classifier to adapt to changes in the MES. This study compared the continuously trained linear discriminant analysis classifier with a noncontinuously trained classifier, using data collected from six subjects. An average improvement of 2.57% was seen with the continuously trained classifier.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.556

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.234 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCMBES ProceedingsSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207