MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000247354 · doi:10.1109/tnsre.2020.2966749

Unsupervised Cross-Subject Adaptation for Predicting Human Locomotion Intent

2020· article· en· W3000247354 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaGuangdong Province Introduction of Innovative R&D TeamNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)Adaptation (eye)Artificial intelligenceWearable computerTest setMachine learningIndependence (probability theory)RobotHidden Markov modelSubject (documents)Cross-validationPattern recognition (psychology)PsychologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurately predicting human locomotion intent is beneficial in controlling wearable robots and in assisting humans to walk smoothly on different terrains. Traditional methods for predicting human locomotion intent require collecting and labeling the human signals, and training specific classifiers for each new subject, which introduce a heavy burden on both the subject and the researcher. In addressing this issue, the present study liberates the subject and the researcher from labeling a large amount of data, by incorporating an unsupervised cross-subject adaptation method to predict the locomotion intent of a target subject whose signals are not labeled. The adaptation is realized by designing two classifiers to maximize the classification discrepancy and a feature generator to align the hidden features of the source and the target subjects to minimize the classification discrepancy. A neural network is trained by the labeled training set of source subjects and the unlabeled training set of target subjects. Then it is validated and tested on the validation set and the test set of target subjects. Experimental results in the leave-one-subject-out test indicate that the present method can classify the locomotion intent and activities of target subjects at the averaged accuracy of 93.60% and 94.59% on two public datasets. The present method increases the user-independence of the classifiers, but it has been evaluated only on the data of subjects without disabilities. The potential of the present method to predict the locomotion intent of subjects with disabilities and control the wearable robots will be evaluated in future work.

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.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score0.848

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.213 · 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