MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921929314 · doi:10.1109/tnsre.2019.2904477

Online Learning of Gait Models From Older Adult Data

2019· article· en· W2921929314 on OpenAlexafffund
Jamie L. S. Waugh, Elaine M. Huang, Julia Fraser, Kristopher Blaine Beyer, Anton Trinh, William E. McIlroy, Dana Kulić

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGait Recognition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersElse Kröner-Fresenius-StiftungOntario Council on Graduate Studies, Council of Ontario Universities
KeywordsGaitComputer scienceSwingWearable computerRepresentation (politics)Machine learningIdentification (biology)AccelerometerArtificial intelligenceGait analysisWork (physics)Wearable technologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a novel approach for online, individualized gait analysis, based on an adaptive periodic model of any gait signal. The proposed method learns a model of the gait cycle during online measurement, using a continuous representation that can adapt to inter- and intra-personal variability by creating an individualized model. Once the algorithm has converged to the input signal, key gait events can be identified based on the estimated gait phase and amplitude. The approach is implemented and tested on retirement home resident 6 min walk (6MW) data using wearable accelerometers at the ankle. The proposed approach converges within approximately four gait cycles and achieves 3% error in detecting initial swing events.11 An early version of this work was presented in [1]. A more extensive description of related work and an extended method, including optimization of learning rates, were added to this paper. Further, this paper applies and evaluates the method to a new and much larger gait dataset taken from older adults who each have a variety of medical conditions. Therefore, the experimental protocol was also updated and the results are entirely novel.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.564

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.200 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation EngineeringSame topicGait Recognition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207