MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3214921239 · doi:10.3390/s21237891

Design of a Novel Wearable System for Foot Clearance Estimation

2021· article· en· W3214921239 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Shilpa Jacob, Geoff Fernie, Atena Roshan Fekr

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsWearable computerComputer scienceTrippingSimulationMotion captureGait analysisGaitOffset (computer science)Physical medicine and rehabilitationArtificial intelligenceMotion (physics)MedicineEngineeringEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trip-related falls are one of the major causes of injury among seniors in Canada and can be attributable to an inadequate Minimum Toe Clearance (MTC). Currently, motion capture systems are the gold standard for measuring MTC; however, they are expensive and have a restricted operating area. In this paper, a novel wearable system is proposed that can estimate different foot clearance parameters accurately using only two Time-of-Flight (ToF) sensors located at the toe and heel of the shoe. A small-scale preliminary study was conducted to investigate the feasibility of foot clearance estimation using the proposed wearable system. We recruited ten young, healthy females to walk at three self-selected speeds (normal, slow, and fast) while wearing the system. Our data analysis showed an average correlation coefficient of 0.94, 0.94, 0.92 for the normal, slow, and fast speed, respectively, when comparing the ToF signals with motion capture. The ANOVA analysis confirmed these results further by revealing no statistically significant differences between the ToF signals and motion capture data for most of the gait parameters after applying the newly proposed foot angle and offset compensation. In addition, the proposed system can measure the MTC with an average Mean Error (ME) of -0.08 ± 3.69 mm, -0.12 ± 4.25 mm, and -0.10 ± 6.57 mm for normal, slow, and fast walking speeds, respectively. The proposed affordable wearable system has the potential to perform real-time MTC estimation and contribute to future work focused on minimizing tripping risks.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207