MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283156177 · doi:10.3390/mi13060973

Design and Development of a Smart IoT-Based Robotic Solution for Wrist Rehabilitation

2022· article· en· W4283156177 on OpenAlexaff
Yassine Bouteraa, Ismail Ben Abdallah, Khaled Alnowaiser, Md Rasedul Islam, Atef Ibrahim, Fayez Gebali

Bibliographic record

VenueMicromachines · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersPrince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University
KeywordsInternet of ThingsRehabilitationWristComputer scienceEmbedded systemPhysical medicine and rehabilitationHuman–computer interactionEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMedicinePhysical therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, we present an IoT-based robot for wrist rehabilitation with a new protocol for determining the state of injured muscles as well as providing dynamic model parameters. In this model, the torque produced by the robot and the torque provided by the patient are determined and updated taking into consideration the constraints of fatigue. Indeed, in the proposed control architecture based on the EMG signal extraction, a fuzzy classifier was designed and implemented to estimate muscle fatigue. Based on this estimation, the patient's torque is updated during the rehabilitation session. The first step of this protocol consists of calculating the subject-related parameters. This concerns axis offset, inertial parameters, passive stiffness, and passive damping. The second step is to determine the remaining component of the wrist model, including the interaction torque. The subject must perform the desired movements providing the torque necessary to move the robot in the desired direction. In this case, the robot applies a resistive torque to calculate the torque produced by the patient. After that, the protocol considers the patient and the robot as active and all exercises are performed accordingly. The developed robotics-based solution, including the proposed protocol, was tested on three subjects and showed promising results.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicromachinesSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207