Comparison of Manual Wheelchair and Pushrim-Activated Power-Assisted Wheelchair Propulsion Characteristics during Common Over-Ground Maneuvers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pushrim-activated power-assisted wheels (PAPAWs) are assistive technologies that use force sensor data to provide on-demand propulsion assistance to manual wheelchair users. However, available data about kinetic and kinematic of PAPAW use are mainly limited to experiments performed on a treadmill or using a dynamometer. In this work, we performed experiments to gather kinetics of wheelchair propulsion and kinematics of wheelchair motion for a variety of over-ground wheelchair maneuvers with a manual wheelchair with and without PAPAWs. Our findings revealed that using PAPAWs can significantly reduce the propulsion effort and push frequency. Both linear and angular velocities of the wheelchair were significantly increased when using PAPAWs. Less force and push frequency could potentially reduce risk of chronic upper limb injury. Higher linear velocity could be desirable for various daily life activities; however; the increase in the angular velocity could lead to unintended deviations from a desired path. Future research could investigate PAPAW controllers that amplify the desired intentions of users while mitigating any unwanted behaviours.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".