Classification of Autism and Control Gait in Children Using Multisegment Foot Kinematic Features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous research has demonstrated that children with autism walk with atypical ankle kinematics and kinetics. Although these studies have utilized single-segment foot (SSF) data, multisegment foot (MSF) kinematics can provide further information on foot mechanics. Machine learning (ML) tools allow the combination of MSF kinematic features for classifying autism gait patterns. In this study, multiple ML models are investigated, and the most contributing features are determined. This study involved 19 children with autism and 21 age-matched controls performing walking trials. A 34-marker system and a 12-camera motion capture system were used to compute SSF and MSF angles during walking. Features extracted from these foot angles and their combinations were used to develop support vector machine (SVM) models. Additional techniques-S Hapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) and the Shapley Additive Global importancE (SAGE) are used for local and global importance of the black-box ML models. The results suggest that models based on combinations of MSF kinematic features classify autism patterns with an accuracy of 96.3%, which is higher than using SSF kinematic features (83.8%). The relative angle between the metatarsal and midfoot segments had the highest contribution to the classification of autism gait patterns. The study demonstrated that kinematic features from MSF angles, supported by ML models, can provide an accurate and interpretable classification of autism and control patterns in children.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".