MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376869335 · doi:10.18280/isi.280223

Individual Recognition Based on Gait Using Multi-Distance Signal Level Difference Sample Entropy

2023· article· en· W4376869335 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Istiqomah, Achmad Rizal, Ratri Dwi Atmaja

Bibliographic record

VenueIngénierie des systèmes d information · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGait Recognition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSample entropyPattern recognition (psychology)GaitArtificial intelligenceSample (material)Computer scienceMathematicsStatisticsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysicsMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The way a person walks has unique characteristics for each individual and can be used to recognize them.There are various ways to classify characteristics for gait of each individual, one of them is the inertia sensor.The inertia sensor is used to collect data gait signals, which are angular velocity variations caused by human walking movements.Multidistance Signal Level Difference Sample Entropy is proposed in this study as a feature extraction before classifying individual gaits.MSLD is used to measure the co-occurrence of two signal samples at a distance d, and SampEn quantizes signal complexity.The MSLD Entropy produce 60 features in the form of SampEn at distances of 1 until 20 from the threeaxis.The testing procedure is carried out on the MSLD Entropy result signal for each classifier with a feature in the form of SampEn at distances of d=1-20, d=1-15, d=1-10, and d=1-5.Softmax regression as a classifier and feature at distance 1 until 20, the test results produce the greatest accuracy of 98.3%.Because a person's gait can be identified not just from one but three directions, using only one axis results in lesser accuracy than using data from all three axes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.877

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIngénierie des systèmes d informationSame topicGait Recognition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207