Unrestricted stride detection during stair climbing using IMUs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stride detection, or the identification of the initial (IC) and terminal contact (TC) of the feet while walking, is important for gait analysis. Automatic stride detection based only on kinematic data is challenging, even when using portable, low-cost, user-friendly Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs). Although there are algorithms for straight walking available, they are often not applicable to other movement patterns. Furthermore, these algorithms are based on the use of different IMUs placed on different locations of the body with different pre-processing filters and rely on analyzing different measurement signals. Therefore, it is difficult to apply existing algorithms for specific study settings. To achieve a new algorithm, thirty-five healthy participants were analyzed during walking and stair climbing while kinematic motion data was measured using the IMU system MyoMotion. Based on the analysis of different published methods for IC and TC detection, a new robust stride detection algorithm was developed and validated in comparison with two different algorithms. From this, it was determined that the newly developed algorithm was successful in automatic stride detection during walking and ascending/ descending stairs with 100% detected gait events, while the other algorithms failed during stair climbing with only 44% and 91% detected gait events.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".