Auditory cueing strategy for stride length and cadence modification: a feasibility study with healthy adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
People with Parkinson's Disease experience gait impairments that significantly impact their quality of life. Visual, auditory, and tactile cues can alleviate gait impairments, but they can become less effective due to the progressive nature of the disease and changes in people's motor capability. In this study, we develop a human-in-the-loop (HIL) framework that monitors two key gait parameters, stride length and cadence, and continuously learns a person-specific model of how the parameters change in response to the feedback. The model is then used in an optimization algorithm to improve the gait parameters. This feasibility study examines whether auditory cues can be used to influence stride length in people without gait impairments. The results demonstrate the benefits of the HIL framework in maintaining people's stride length in the presence of a secondary task.Clinical relevance- This paper proposes a gait rehabilitation framework that provides a personalized cueing strategy based on the person's real-time response to cues. The proposed approach has potential application to people with Parkinson's Disease.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".