MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980107227 · doi:10.1109/embc.2019.8857061

Wearable Fiber Optic Sensors for Biomechanical Sensing via Joint Angle Detection

2019· article· en· W2980107227 on OpenAlexaff
Yannick D’Mello, James Skoric, Lea A. Moukarzel, Siddiqui Hakim, David V. Plant

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceOptical fiberFiber optic sensorAcousticsComputer scienceOpticsBiomedical engineeringFiberComposite materialPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monitoring human biomechanical movement is necessary for the analysis and development of kinesthetic exercise techniques in physical rehabilitation, professional sports, and performance arts. Optical fiber technology offers an attractive solution to motion capture sensing in terms of size, robustness, signal fidelity, and efficiency. We report on the development of PDMS-based fiber optic strain sensors for biomechanical sensing in real-time via the evaluation of skeletal joint angles. The fibers were fabricated using an elastomer and gel combination in a 3:2 ratio. The elasticity and optical loss of this novel fiber material was experimentally characterized for two fiber diameters of 3 mm and 5 mm. The experimental stress-strain behavior was fitted to a 3D hyperelastic Mooney-Rivlin model to obtain C01 and C10 material constants of 0.022 MPa and 0.0308 MPa respectively. Transmission monotonically decreased in response to a stress applied in both the longitudinal (elongation) and lateral (bending) directions. The sensors were demonstrated in a motion sensing implementation by monitoring the joint angle at the elbow in real-time. Measurements indicated a consistent performance of both fiber diameters over the range of motion of the elbow corresponding to flexion and extension. The optical loss increased by 0.1784 dB and 0.1147 dB for each degree of flexion with standard deviation error in measurement of 3.525° and 4.672° for the 3 mm and 5 mm fiber diameters, respectively. The results demonstrate the potential of this system for real-time, wearable biomechanical sensing, motion capture systems, and as a feedback mechanism in prosthetics and robotics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207