MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037449341 · doi:10.1109/tbme.2020.3004491

Cable-Driven Robotic Interface for Lower Limb Neuromechanics Identification

2020· article· en· W3037449341 on OpenAlexaff
Hsien-Yung Huang, Ildar Farkhatdinov, Arash Arami, Mohamed Bouri, Etienne Burdet

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of WaterlooUniversity Health Network
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeEuropean Commission
KeywordsKinematicsSagittal planeComputer scienceAnkleRigidity (electromagnetism)ElectromyographySimulationInterface (matter)EngineeringStructural engineeringPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysicsAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a versatile cable-driven robotic interface to investigate the single-joint joint neuromechanics of the hip, knee and ankle in the sagittal plane. This endpoint-based interface offers highly dynamic interaction and accurate position control (as is typically required for neuromechanics identification), and provides measurements of position, interaction force and electromyography (EMG) of leg muscles. It can be used with the subject upright, corresponding to a natural posture during walking or standing, and does not impose kinematic constraints on a joint, in contrast to existing interfaces. Mechanical evaluations demonstrated that the interface yields a rigidity above 500 N/m with low viscosity. Tests with a rigid dummy leg and linear springs show that it can identify the mechanical impedance of a limb accurately. A smooth perturbation is developed and tested with a human subject, which can be used to estimate the hip neuromechanics.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.750

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Biomedical EngineeringSame topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207