MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4321442790 · doi:10.1101/2023.02.19.529141

Predicting vertical and shear ground reaction forces during walking and jogging using wearable plantar pressure insoles

2023· preprint· en· W4321442790 on OpenAlexaff
Maryam Hajizadeh, Allison L. Clouthier, Marshall Kendall, Ryan B. Graham

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGround reaction forceShear forcePlantar pressureForce platformComputer scienceSimulationCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)Work (physics)Physical medicine and rehabilitationPressure sensorEngineeringStructural engineeringMedicineKinematicsMechanicsPhysicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background The development of plantar pressure insoles has made them a potential replacement for force plates. These wearable devices can measure multiple steps and might be used outside of the lab environment for rehabilitation and evaluation of sport performance. However, they can only measure the normal force which does not completely represent the vertical ground reaction force (GRF). In addition, they are not able to measure shear forces which play an import role in the dynamic performance of individuals. Indirect approaches might be implemented to improve the accuracy of the force estimated by plantar pressure systems. Research question The aim of this study was to predict the vertical and shear components of ground reaction force from plantar pressure data using recurrent neural networks. Methods GRF and plantar pressure data were collected from sixteen healthy individuals during 10 trials of walking and five trials of jogging using Bertec force plates and FScan plantar pressure insoles. A long short-term memory (LSTM) neural network was built to consider the time dependency of pressure and force data in predictions. The data were split into three subsets of train, to train the LSTM model, evaluate, to optimize the model hyperparameters, and test sets, to assess the accuracy of the model predictions. Results The results of this study showed that our LSTM model could accurately predict the shear and vertical GRF components during walking and jogging. The predictions were more accurate during walking compared to jogging. In addition, the predictions of mediolateral force had higher error and lower correlation compared to vertical and anteroposterior components. Significance The LSTM model developed in this study may be an acceptable option for accurate estimation of GRF during outdoor activities which can have significant impacts in rehabilitation, sport performance, and gaming.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicSports Performance and Training→French-language works237,207→