System based on subject-specific bands to recognize pedaling motor imagery: towards a BCI for lower-limb rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to propose a recognition system of pedaling motor imagery for lower-limb rehabilitation, which uses unsupervised methods to improve the feature extraction, and consequently the class discrimination of EEG patterns. APPROACH: After applying a spectrogram based on short-time Fourier transform (SSTFT), both sparseness constraints and total power are used on the time-frequency representation to automatically locate the subject-specific bands that pack the highest power during pedaling motor imagery. The output frequency bands are employed in the recognition system to automatically adjust the cut-off frequency of a low-pass filter (Butterworth, 2nd order). Riemannian geometry is also used to extract spatial features, which are further analyzed through a fast version of neighborhood component analysis to increase the class separability. MAIN RESULTS: For ten healthy subjects, our recognition system based on subject-specific bands achieved mean accuracy of [Formula: see text] and mean Kappa of [Formula: see text]. SIGNIFICANCE: Our approach can be used to obtain a low-cost robotic rehabilitation system based on motorized pedal, as pedaling exercises have shown great potential for improving the muscular performance of post-stroke survivors.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".