An Adaptive Pedaling Assistive Device for Asymmetric Torque Assistant in Cycling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dynamic loads have short and long-term effects in the rehabilitation of lower limb joints. However, an effective exercise program for lower limb rehabilitation has been debated for a long time. Cycling ergometers were instrumented and used as a tool to mechanically load the lower limbs and track the joint mechano-physiological response in rehabilitation programs. Current cycling ergometers apply symmetrical loading to the limbs, which may not reflect the actual load-bearing capacity of each limb, as in Parkinson’s and Multiple Sclerosis diseases. Therefore, the present study aimed to develop a new cycling ergometer capable of applying asymmetric loads to the limbs and validate its function using human tests. The instrumented force sensor and crank position sensing system recorded the kinetics and kinematics of pedaling. This information was used to apply an asymmetric assistive torque only to the target leg using an electric motor. The performance of the proposed cycling ergometer was studied during a cycling task at three different intensities. It was shown that the proposed device reduced the pedaling force of the target leg by 19% to 40%, depending on the exercise intensity. This reduction in pedal force caused a significant reduction in the muscle activity of the target leg (p < 0.001), without affecting the muscle activity of the non-target leg. These results demonstrated that the proposed cycling ergometer device is capable of applying asymmetric loading to lower limbs, and thus has the potential to improve the outcome of exercise interventions in patients with asymmetric function in lower limbs.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".