Reducing Noise, Artifacts and Interference in Single-Channel EMG Signals : A Review
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
EMG analysis is becoming increasingly important in many research and clinical applications, including muscle fatigue detection, control of robotic mechanisms and prostheses, clinical diagnosis of neuromuscular diseases and quantification of force. However, electromyographic signals can be contaminated by various types of noise, interference and artifacts, which can lead to misinterpretation of the data acquired using this method. Even assuming best practices, the collected signal may still be altered by such contaminants. The aim of this paper is to review methods employed to reduce contamination of single channel EMG signals. This review is limited to methods performed directly on the measured EMG signal and those that allow total reconstruction of the EMG signal. Subtraction methods used in the time domain, denoising methods performed after signal decomposition and hybrid methods are assessed. It is defended that individual methods may be more or less suitable for a particular application depending on contaminant(s) present in the signal and on the specific requirements of the application.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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