MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087253146 · doi:10.1109/jbhi.2020.3024925

Spatiotemporal Gait Measurement With a Side-View Depth Sensor Using Human Joint Proposals

2020· article· en· W3087253146 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew Hynes, Stephen Czarnuch, Megan C. Kirkland, Michelle Ploughman

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGaitGait analysisComputer scienceSTRIDEComputer visionMathematicsIntraclass correlationArtificial intelligenceGround truthPhysical medicine and rehabilitationStatisticsReproducibilityMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose a method for calculating standard spatiotemporal gait parameters from individual human joints with a side-view depth sensor. Clinical walking trials were measured concurrently by a side-view Kinect and a pressure-sensitive walkway, the Zeno Walkway. Multiple joint proposals were generated from depth images by a stochastic predictor based on the Kinect algorithm. The proposals are represented as vertices in a weighted graph, where the weights depend on the expected and measured lengths between body parts. A shortest path through the graph is a set of joints from head to foot. Accurate foot positions are selected by comparing pairs of shortest paths. Stance phases of the feet are detected by examining the motion of the feet over time. The stance phases are used to calculate four gait parameters: stride length, step length, stride width, and stance percentage. A constant frame rate was assumed for the calculation of stance percentage because time stamps were not captured during the experiment. Gait parameters from 52 trials were compared to the ground truth walkway using Bland-Altman analysis and intraclass correlation coefficients. The large spatial parameters had the strongest agreements with the walkway (ICC(2, 1) = 1.00 and 0.98 for stride and step length with normal pace, respectively). The presented system directly calculates gait parameters from individual foot positions while previous side-view systems relied on indirect measures. Using a side-view system allows for tracking walking in both directions with one camera, extending the range in which the subject is in the field of view.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health InformaticsSame topicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207