Decision-change Informed Rejection Improves Robustness in Pattern Recognition-based Myoelectric Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Post-processing techniques have been shown to improve the quality of the decision stream generated by classifiers used in pattern-recognition-based myoelectric control. However, these techniques have largely been tested individually and on well-behaved, stationary data, failing to fully evaluate their trade-offs between smoothing and latency during dynamic use. Correspondingly, in this work, we survey and compare 8 different post-processing and decision stream improvement schemes in the context of continuous and dynamic class transitions: majority vote, Bayesian fusion, onset locking, outlier detection, confidence-based rejection, confidence scaling, prior adjustment, and adaptive windowing. We then propose two new temporally aware post-processing schemes that use changes in the decision and confidence streams to better reject uncertain decisions. Our decision-change informed rejection (DCIR) approach outperforms existing schemes during both steady-state and transitions based on error rates and decision stream volatility whether using a LDA or SVM classifier, or a deep LSTM model. These results suggest that added robustness can be gained by appropriately leveraging temporal context in myoelectric control.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".