MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multi-Modal Motion-Capture-Based Biometric Systems for Emergency Response and Patient Rehabilitation

2018· book-chapter· en· W2905028258 on OpenAlexaff
Marina L. Gavrilova, Ferdous Ahmed, A. S. M. Hossain Bari, Ruixuan Liu, Tiantian Liu, Yann Maret, Brandon Sieu, Tanuja Sudhakar

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in medical technologies and clinical practice book series · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGait Recognition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsMotion captureGaitArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceModalGestureComputer visionHuman–computer interactionRehabilitationClassifier (UML)EngineeringMotion (physics)Physical medicine and rehabilitationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter outlines the current state of the art of Kinect sensor gait and activity authentication. It also focuses on emotional cues that could be observed from human body and posture. It presents a prototype of a system that combines recently developed behavioral gait and posture recognition methods for human emotion identification. A backbone of the system is Kinect sensor gait recognition, which explores the relationship between joint-relative angles and joint-relative distances through machine learning. The chapter then introduces a real-time gesture recognition system developed using Kinect sensor and trained with SVM classifier. Preliminary experimental results demonstrate accuracy and feasibility of using such systems in real-world scenarios. While gait and emotion from body movement has been researched in the context of standalone biometric security systems, they were never previously explored for physiotherapy rehabilitation and real-time patient feedback. The survey of recent progress and open problems in crucial areas of medical patient rehabilitation and rescue operations conclude this chapter.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.316 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in medical technologies and clinical practice book seriesSame topicGait Recognition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207