MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297491420 · doi:10.3390/s22197322

Using Deep Learning for Task and Tremor Type Classification in People with Parkinson’s Disease

2022· article· en· W4297491420 on OpenAlexafffund
Ghazal Farhani, Yue Zhou, Mary E. Jenkins, Michael D. Naish, Ana Luisa Trejos

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersOntario Ministry of Research and InnovationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCompute CanadaMinistero dello Sviluppo EconomicoCalifornia HIV/AIDS Research Program
KeywordsTask (project management)Wearable computerMotion (physics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationIdentification (biology)Parkinson's diseaseElectromyographyMachine learningDiseaseMedicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hand tremor is one of the dominating symptoms of Parkinson's disease (PD), which significantly limits activities of daily living. Along with medications, wearable devices have been proposed to suppress tremor. However, suppressing tremor without interfering with voluntary motion remains challenging and improvements are needed. The main goal of this work was to design algorithms for the automatic identification of the tremor type and voluntary motions, using only surface electromyography (sEMG) data. Towards this goal, a bidirectional long short-term memory (BiLSTM) algorithm was implemented that uses sEMG data to identify the motion and tremor type of people living with PD when performing a task. Moreover, in order to automate the training process, hyperparamter selection was performed using a regularized evolutionary algorithm. The results show that the accuracy of task classification among 15 people living with PD was 84±8%, and the accuracy of tremor classification was 88±5%. Both models performed significantly above chance levels (20% and 33% for task and tremor classification, respectively). Thus, it was concluded that the trained models, based on using purely sEMG signals, could successfully identify the task and tremor types.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.245 · 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
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207