MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887983676 · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2018.2864335

Multiday Evaluation of Techniques for EMG-Based Classification of Hand Motions

2018· article· en· W2887983676 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersHigher Education Commision, PakistanNational University of Sciences and TechnologyHigher Education Commission, Pakistan
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)Computer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Currently, most of the adopted myoelectric schemes for upper limb prostheses do not provide users with intuitive control. Higher accuracies have been reported using different classification algorithms but investigation on the reliability over time for these methods is very limited. In this study, we compared for the first time the longitudinal performance of selected state-of-the-art techniques for electromyography (EMG) based classification of hand motions. Experiments were conducted on ten able-bodied and six transradial amputees for seven continuous days. Linear discriminant analysis (LDA), artificial neural network (ANN), support vector machine (SVM), K-nearest neighbor (KNN), and decision trees (TREE) were compared. Comparative analysis showed that the ANN attained highest classification accuracy followed by LDA. Three-way repeated ANOVA test showed a significant difference (P < 0.001) between EMG types (surface, intramuscular, and combined), days (1-7), classifiers, and their interactions. Performance on the last day was significantly better (P < 0.05) than the first day for all classifiers and EMG types. Within-day, classification error (WCE) across all subject and days in ANN was: surface (9.12 ± 7.38%), intramuscular (11.86 ± 7.84%), and combined (6.11 ± 7.46%). The between-day analysis in a leave-one-day-out fashion showed that the ANN was the optimal classifier (surface (21.88 ± 4.14%), intramuscular (29.33 ± 2.58%), and combined (14.37 ± 3.10%). Results indicate that within day performances of classifiers may be similar but over time, it may lead to a substantially different outcome. Furthermore, training ANN on multiple days might allow capturing time-dependent variability in the EMG signals and thus minimizing the necessity for daily system recalibration.

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.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.159

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.278 · 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