Development and Validation of Ambulosono: A Wearable Sensor for Bio-Feedback Rehabilitation Training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wearable technology-based measurement systems hold potential for the therapeutic and rehabilitation management of patients with various chronic diseases. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy and test⁻retest reliability of a new-generation wearable sensor-based system, dubbed Ambulosono, for bio-feedback training. The Ambulosono sensor system was cross-validated by comparing its functionality with the iPod touch (4th generation) sensor system. Fifteen participants underwent a gait test to measure various gait parameters while wearing both the iPod-based and Ambulosono sensors simultaneously. The physically measured values (i.e., the true values) of step length, distance traveled, velocity, and cadence were then compared to those obtained via the two-sensor systems using the same calculation algorithms. While the mean percentage error was <10% for all measured parameters, and the intra-class correlation coefficient revealed a high level of agreement between trials for both sensor systems, it was found that the Ambulosono sensor system outperformed the iPod-based system in some respects. The Ambulosono sensor system possessed both reliability and accuracy in obtaining gait parameter measurements, which suggests it can serve as an economical alternative to the iPod-based system that is currently used in various clinical rehabilitation programs.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".