Deep Multi-Scale Fusion of Convolutional Neural Networks for EMG-Based Movement Estimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
EMG-based motion estimation is required for applications such as myoelectric control, where the simultaneous estimation of kinematic information, namely joint angle and velocity, is challenging and critical. We propose a novel method for accurately modelling the generated joint angle and velocity simultaneously under isotonic, isokinetic (quasi-dynamic), and fully dynamic conditions. Our solution uses two streams of CNN, called TS-CNN to learn informative features from raw EMG data using different scales and estimate the generated motion during elbow flexion and extension. The experimental results show the robustness of our approach in comparison to conventional CNN as well as some methods used in the literature. The best obtained <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">${R}^{2}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> values, are 0.81±0.06, 0.71±0.06, and 0.80±0.13 for joint angle estimation and 0.78±0.05, 0.79±0.07, and 0.71±0.13 for the velocity estimation, during isotonic, isokinetic, and dynamic contractions, respectively. Additionally, our results indicate that the experimental condition can have an impact on the model’s performance for motion prediction. EMG-based velocity estimation obtains higher performance than joint angle estimation under isokinetic conditions. Under dynamic conditions, joint angle estimation is more accurate than velocity estimation, and there is no difference between joint angle and velocity estimation in the isotonic case.
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".