EMG-Based Intention Detection Using Deep Learning for Shared Control in Upper-Limb Assistive Exoskeletons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the field of human-robot interaction, surface electromyography (sEMG) provides a valuable tool for measuring active muscular effort. While numerous studies have investigated real-time control of upper extremity exoskeletons based on user intention and task-specific movements, the prediction of body joint positions based on EMG features has remained largely unexplored. In this letter, we address this gap by proposing a novel approach that leverages Convolutional Neural Networks and Long-Short-Term Memory (CNN-LSTM) models to generate exoskeleton joint trajectories. Our methodology involves collecting data from three channels of EMG and three degrees-of-freedom (DoF) joint angles and enables us to position control a pneumatic cable-driven upper-limb exoskeleton, thereby assisting users in various tasks. Through extensive experimentation, our intention-based model demonstrates robust performance across different speeds and is capable of detecting variations in payload and electrode placement. The empirical results yielded from our study underscore the efficacy of our approach, particularly in reducing the EMG levels of the user during different tasks by providing exoskeleton assistance as needed.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".