Individuality decoded by running patterns: Movement characteristics that determine the uniqueness of human running
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human gait is as unique to an individual as is their fingerprint. It remains unknown, however, what gait characteristics differentiate well between individuals that could define the uniqueness of human gait. The purpose of this work was to determine the gait characteristics that were most relevant for a neural network to identify individuals based on their running patterns. An artificial neural network was trained to recognize kinetic and kinematic movement trajectories of overground running from 50 healthy novice runners (males and females). Using layer-wise relevance propagation, the contribution of each variable to the classification result of the neural network was determined. It was found that gait characteristics of the coronal and transverse plane as well as medio-lateral ground reaction forces provided more information for subject identification than gait characteristics of the sagittal plane and ground reaction forces in vertical or anterior-posterior direction. Additionally, gait characteristics during the early stance were more relevant for gait recognition than those of the mid and late stance phase. It was concluded that the uniqueness of human gait is predominantly encoded in movements of the coronal and transverse plane during early stance.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".