Integrating computer vision to prosthetic hand control with sEMG: Preliminary results in grasp classification
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
The myoelectric prosthesis is a promising tool to restore the hand abilities of amputees, but the classification accuracy of surface electromyography (sEMG) is not high enough for real-time application. Researchers proposed integrating sEMG signals with another feature that is not affected by amputation. The strong coordination between vision and hand manipulation makes us consider including visual information in prosthetic hand control. In this study, we identified a sweet period during the early reaching phase in which the vision data could yield a higher accuracy in classifying the grasp patterns. Moreover, the visual classification results from the sweet period could be naturally integrated with sEMG data collected during the grasp phase. After the integration, the accuracy of grasp classification increased from 85.5% (only sEMG) to 90.06% (integrated). Knowledge gained from this study encourages us to further explore the methods for incorporating computer vision into myoelectric data to enhance the movement control of prosthetic hands.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it