Real-Time Performance Assessment of High-Order Tremor Estimators Used in a Wearable Tremor Suppression Device
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The side effects and complications of traditional treatments for treating pathological tremor have led to a growing research interest in wearable tremor suppression devices (WTSDs) as an alternative approach. Similar to how the human brain coordinates the function of the human system, a tremor estimator determines how a WTSD functions. Although many tremor estimation algorithms have been developed and validated, whether they can be implemented on a cost-effective embedded system has not been studied; furthermore, their effectiveness on tremor signals with multiple harmonics has not been investigated. Therefore, in this study, four tremor estimators were implemented, evaluated, and compared: Weighted-frequency Fourier Linear Combiner (WFLC), WFLC-based Kalman Filter (WFLC-KF), Band-limited Multiple FLC, and enhanced High-order WFLC-KF (eHWFLC-KF). This study aimed to evaluate the performance of each algorithm on a bench-top tremor suppression system with 18 recorded tremor motion datasets; and compare the performance of each estimator. The experimental evaluation showed that the eHWFLC-KF-based WTSD achieved the best performance when suppressing tremor with an average of 89.3% reduction in tremor power, and an average error when tracking voluntary motion of 6.6°/s. Statistical analysis indicated that the eHWFLC-KF-based WTSD is able to reduce the power of tremor better than the WFLC and WFLC-KF, and the BMFLC-based WTSD is better than the WFLC. The performance when tracking voluntary motion is similar among all systems. This study has proven the feasibility of implementing various tremor estimators in a cost-effective embedded system, and provided a real-time performance assessment of four tremor estimators.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".