MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2809725077

Improving Wrist Force Estimation With Surface EMG During Isometric Contractions

2018· article· en· W2809725077 on OpenAlexaff
Gelareh Hajian, Behnam Behinaein, Evelyn Morin, Sadegh Etemad

Bibliographic record

VenueCMBES Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrachioradialisIsometric exerciseBicepsSIGNAL (programming language)ElectromyographyComputer scienceSpectral densityMathematicsStatisticsAnatomyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, methods for selecting channels to improve estimated force using fast orthogonal search (FOS) have been investigated and a new method is proposed. The surface electromyogram (sEMG) signal acquired from linear surface electrode arrays, placed on the long head and short head of biceps brachii and brachioradialis during isometric contractions are used to estimate force induced at wrist using the FOS algorithm. In this paper, the effects of the sEMG signal characteristics obtained from the arrays and channels’ locations on the estimated force are investigated to find channels resulting in force estimation improvement compared to using all available channels. Several methods for channel selection have been studied, showing that the sensitivity of the estimated force to the location of the channels is subject-dependent. The proposed method uses only the channels with highest mean of power spectrum density (PSD) and low cross correlations. The channels selected by this method have improved FOS force estimate compared to using all the available channels.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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