Detection of Stride Time and Stance Phase Ratio from Accelerometer Data for Gait Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stride time and stance phase ratio are supportive biomarkers used in the diagnosis and treatment of gait disorders and are currently frequently used in research studies. In this study, the 3-axis accelerometer signal, taken from the foot, was denoised by a low-pass FIR (finite impulse response) filter. By using the fundamental frequency analysis the dominant frequency was found and with that frequency an optimal length for a window to be shifted across the whole signal for further purposes. And the turning region was extracted by using the Pearson correlation coefficient with the segments that overlapped by shifting the selected window over the whole signal, after getting the walking segments the stride time parameter is calculated by using a simple peak-picking algorithm. The stance and swing periods of the pseudo-steps, which emerged as a result of the double step time calculation algorithm, were found with the dynamic time warping method, and the ratio of the stance phase in a step to the whole step was calculated as a percentage. The results found were compared with the results of the APDM system, and the mean absolute error rate was calculated as 0.029 s for the stride time and 0.0084 for the stance phase ratio.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it