MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4242958173 · doi:10.1504/ijcat.2019.10021778

Novel adaptive iterative observer based on integral backstepping control of a wearable robotic exoskeleton

2019· article· en· W4242958173 on OpenAlexaff
Abdelkrim Brahmi, Mohammad Habibur Rahman, Brahim Brahmi, Maarouf Saad, Cristóbal Ochoa-Luna

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Computer Applications in Technology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacksteppingPowered exoskeletonExoskeletonControl theory (sociology)Robustness (evolution)Computer scienceActuatorRobotRehabilitationControl engineeringPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSimulationEngineeringControl (management)Adaptive controlArtificial intelligenceMedicinePhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Assisted control seeks to help subjects to perform physical movements of the body, which they cannot do by themselves. Passive rehabilitation therapy is very important and vital after the stroke accident. In this functioning mode, the subject is completely passive during the movement. The robot brings the injured upper arm of the patient to perform repetitive therapeutic exercises. In this case, the subject's force and the uncertainties caused by repetitive motion, such as mechanical and actuator fatigue, are considered as external disturbances that negatively influence the performance of the exoskeleton robot. To ensure the stability, robustness, and accuracy of the robot, a robust iterative observer based on nonlinear integral backstepping control was implemented with designed exercises performed by subjects. Experimental results show the effectiveness of the proposed control to deal with the external force and repetitive/periodic uncertainties.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Computer Applications in TechnologySame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207