MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047198360 · doi:10.3390/s20154345

Estimating Vertical Ground Reaction Force during Walking Using a Single Inertial Sensor

2020· article· en· W3047198360 on OpenAlexafffund
Xianta Jiang, Christopher Napier, Brett C. Hannigan, Janice J. Eng, Carlo Menon

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreSimon Fraser UniversityVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsInertial measurement unitGround reaction forceGaitMathematicsAccelerometerTreadmillForce platformGait analysisUnits of measurementPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSimulationComputer scienceKinematicsPhysical therapyMedicineArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vertical ground reaction force (vGRF) and its passive and active peaks are important gait parameters and of great relevance for musculoskeletal injury analysis and prevention, the detection of gait abnormities, and the evaluation of lower-extremity prostheses. Most currently available methods to estimate the vGRF require a force plate. However, in real-world scenarios, gait monitoring would not be limited to a laboratory setting. This paper reports a novel solution using machine learning algorithms to estimate the vGRF and the timing and magnitude of its peaks from data collected by a single inertial measurement unit (IMU) on one of the lower limb locations. Nine volunteers participated in this study, walking on a force plate-instrumented treadmill at various speeds. Four IMUs were worn on the foot, shank, distal thigh, and proximal thigh, respectively. A random forest model was employed to estimate the vGRF from data collected by each of the IMUs. We evaluated the performance of the models against the gold standard measurement of the vGRF generated by the treadmill. The developed model achieved a high accuracy with a correlation coefficient, root mean square error, and normalized root mean square error of 1.00, 0.02 body weight (BW), and 1.7% in intra-participant testing, and 0.97, 0.10 BW, and 7.15% in inter-participant testing, respectively, for the shank location. The difference between the reference and estimated passive force peak values was 0.02 BW and 0.14 BW with a delay of -0.14% and 0.57% of stance duration for the intra- and inter-participant testing, respectively; the difference between the reference and estimated active force peak values was 0.02 BW and 0.08 BW with a delay of 0.45% and 1.66% of stance duration for the intra- and inter-participant evaluation, respectively. We concluded that vertical ground reaction force can be estimated using only a single IMU via machine learning algorithms. This research sheds light on the development of a portable wearable gait monitoring system reporting the real-time vGRF in real-life scenarios.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.704

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 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

Citations65
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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