Optimization and Evaluation of Spinal Exoskeleton Design Concepts using Optimal Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exoskeletons for the lower back are promising tools to support workers during heavy lifting tasks. Their development process faces several challenges. It is still not known which criteria the support must meet to prevent low-back pain and how users of different body stature and execution of lifting movements influence it. Thus, studying these factors needs an extensive testing on the human body and every considered design concept needs already a sophisticated prototype that subjects can wear for several hours. To overcome this issue, we propose a method using multibody dynamics and optimal control to optimize the design of an existing prototype (PO) as well as evaluate a new concept (DC) that incorporates motors at the hip joint. A dynamic model of the prototype with matching torque generation was developed, which also takes an approximation of possible misalignment into account. The human-robot interaction is simulated in an all-at-once approach that allows to calculate the muscle activity of the user required in addition to the exoskeleton support to reproduce recorded lifting motions. By minimizing the users' muscle activity, parameters describing the characteristics of the passive elements and, in case of DC, motor torque profiles are optimized. Compared to the initial setup, a significant improvement in exoskeletal support was achieved across all subjects in both cases while contact forces remained within prescribed limits to ensure a comfortable usage of the device. DC provides less support than PO but better control of the human-robot interaction.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".