MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Exoskeleton for Hemiplegic Patients: Mechatronic Approach to Move One Disabled Lower Limb with Posture Recognition Neural Network for More Safety

2020· article· en· W3114227528 on OpenAlexaff
Alaoui Hamza, Mohamed Tarik Moutacalli, Ahmed Chebak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExoskeletonComputer sciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationMechatronicsProcess (computing)Simple (philosophy)Face (sociological concept)Artificial intelligenceLower limbHuman–computer interactionComputer visionSimulationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of people suffering from hemiplegia is growing each year. This lower limb disability affects all the aspects of their lives by taking away their autonomy. This implicates their close relatives, as well as the health system to provide the necessary care they need. The integration of exoskeletons in the medical field became a promising solution to resolve this issue. This paper presents an exoskeleton designed to help hemiplegic people get back the sensation and ability of normal walking, with the integration of posture recognition using a simple RGB camera to insure safety. Three step models have been created. The first step allows a simple forward movement of the leg. The second method is designed to overcome some obstacles in the patient path, and finally the third step model gives the patient total control over the device. Each of the control methods was designed to offer a solution to the challenges that the patients may face during the walking process.

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)0.000
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery→French-language works237,207→