MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4319159876 · doi:10.3390/s23031670

Age-Related Reliability of B-Mode Analysis for Tailored Exosuit Assistance

2023· article· en· W4319159876 on OpenAlexaff
Letizia Gionfrida, Richard W. Nuckols, Conor J. Walsh, Robert D. Howe

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMean squared errorWearable computerMean absolute percentage errorPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGastrocnemius muscleStatisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceMedicineSimulationMathematicsPhysical therapyAnatomySkeletal muscle

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the field of wearable robotics, assistance needs to be individualized for the user to maximize benefit. Information from muscle fascicles automatically recorded from brightness mode (B-mode) ultrasound has been used to design assistance profiles that are proportional to the estimated muscle force of young individuals. There is also a desire to develop similar strategies for older adults who may have age-altered physiology. This study introduces and validates a ResNet + 2x-LSTM model for extracting fascicle lengths in young and older adults. The labeling was generated in a semimanual manner for young (40,696 frames) and older adults (34,262 frames) depicting B-mode imaging of the medial gastrocnemius. First, the model was trained on young and tested on both young (R2 = 0.85, RMSE = 2.36 ± 1.51 mm, MAPE = 3.6%, aaDF = 0.48 ± 1.1 mm) and older adults (R2 = 0.53, RMSE = 4.7 ± 2.51 mm, MAPE = 5.19%, aaDF = 1.9 ± 1.39 mm). Then, the performances were trained across all ages (R2 = 0.79, RMSE = 3.95 ± 2.51 mm, MAPE = 4.5%, aaDF = 0.67 ± 1.8 mm). Although age-related muscle loss affects the error of the tracking methodology compared to the young population, the absolute percentage error for individual fascicles leads to a small variation of 3–5%, suggesting that the error may be acceptable in the generation of assistive force profiles.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensors→Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→