MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949282949 · doi:10.3390/s19122796

Estimation of Ankle Joint Power during Walking Using Two Inertial Sensors

2019· article· en· W2949282949 on OpenAlexafffund
Xianta Jiang, Mohsen Gholami, Mahta Khoshnam, Janice J. Eng, Carlo Menon

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaSimon Fraser University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsAnkleInverse dynamicsGaitInertial measurement unitJoint (building)SimulationTreadmillGround reaction forceGait analysisMean squared errorEngineeringComputer scienceKinematicsMathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationStatisticsStructural engineeringPhysical therapyMedicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(1) Background: Ankle joint power, as an indicator of the ability to control lower limbs, is of great relevance for clinical diagnosis of gait impairment and control of lower limb prosthesis. However, the majority of available techniques for estimating joint power are based on inverse dynamics methods, which require performing a biomechanical analysis of the foot and using a highly instrumented environment to tune the parameters of the resulting biomechanical model. Such techniques are not generally applicable to real-world scenarios in which gait monitoring outside of the clinical setting is desired. This paper proposes a viable alternative to such techniques by using machine learning algorithms to estimate ankle joint power from data collected by two miniature inertial measurement units (IMUs) on the foot and shank, (2) Methods: Nine participants walked on a force-plate-instrumented treadmill wearing two IMUs. The data from the IMUs were processed to train and test a random forest model to estimate ankle joint power. The performance of the model was then evaluated by comparing the estimated power values to the reference values provided by the motion tracking system and the force-plate-instrumented treadmill. (3) Results: The proposed method achieved a high accuracy with the correlation coefficient, root mean square error, and normalized root mean square error of 0.98, 0.06 w/kg, and 1.05% in the intra-subject test, and 0.92, 0.13 w/kg, and 2.37% in inter-subject test, respectively. The difference between the predicted and true peak power values was 0.01 w/kg and 0.14 w/kg with a delay of 0.4% and 0.4% of gait cycle duration for the intra- and inter-subject testing, respectively. (4) Conclusions: The results of this study demonstrate the feasibility of using only two IMUs to estimate ankle joint power. The proposed technique provides a basis for developing a portable and compact gait monitoring system that can potentially offer monitoring and reporting on ankle joint power in real-time during activities of daily living.

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 score0.162
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations36
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207