Computer Vision and Deep Learning for Environment-Adaptive Control of Robotic Lower-Limb Exoskeletons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robotic exoskeletons require human control and decision making to switch between different locomotion modes, which can be inconvenient and cognitively demanding. To support the development of automated locomotion mode recognition systems (i.e., intelligent high-level controllers), we designed an environment recognition system using computer vision and deep learning. Here we first reviewed the development of the "ExoNet" database - the largest and most diverse open-source dataset of wearable camera images of indoor and outdoor real-world walking environments, which were annotated using a hierarchical labelling architecture. We then trained and tested the EfficientNetB0 convolutional neural network, which was optimized for efficiency using neural architecture search, to forward predict the walking environments. Our environment recognition system achieved ~73% image classification accuracy. These results provide the inaugural benchmark performance on the ExoNet database. Future research should evaluate and compare different convolutional neural networks to develop an accurate and real- time environment-adaptive locomotion mode recognition system for robotic exoskeleton control.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".