Predicting foot orthosis deformation based on its contour kinematics during walking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Customized foot orthoses (FOs) are designed based on foot posture and function, while the interaction between these metrics and FO deformation remains unknown due to technical problems. Our aim was to predict FO deformation under dynamic loading using an artificial intelligence (AI) approach, and to report the deformation of two FOs of different stiffness during walking. METHODS: Each FO was fixed on a plate, and six triad reflective markers were fitted on its contour, and 55 markers on its plantar surface. Manual loadings with known magnitude and application point were applied to deform "sport" and "regular" (stiffer) FOs in all regions (training session). Then, 13 healthy male subjects walked with the same FOs inside shoes, where the triad markers were visible by means of shoe holes (walking session). The marker trajectories were recorded using optoelectronic system. A neural network was trained to find the dependency between the orientation of triads on FO contour and the position of markers on its plantar surface. After tuning hyperparameters and evaluating the performance of the model, marker positions on FOs surfaces were predicted during walking for each subject. Statistical parametric mapping was used to compare the pattern of deformation between two FOs. RESULTS: Overall, the model showed an average error of <0.6 mm for predicting the marker positions on both FOs. The training setup was appropriate to simulate the range of triads' displacement and the peak loading on FOs during walking. Sport FO showed different pattern and significantly higher range of deformation during walking compared to regular FO. CONCLUSION: Our technique enables an indirect and accurate estimation of FO surface deformation during walking. The AI model was capable to make a distinction between two FOs with different stiffness and between subjects. This innovative approach can help to optimally customize the FO design.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".