MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adaptive P-Splines for challenging filtering problems in biomechanics

2024· article· en· W4393931630 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew J. Pohl, Matthew Schofield, W. Brent Edwards, Reed Ferber

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biomechanics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Equine Medical Research
Canadian institutionsRunning Injury ClinicUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Innovates
KeywordsSmoothingSpline (mechanical)Smoothing splineMathematicsAlgorithmAutoregressive modelPenalty methodComputer scienceMean squared errorRegularization (linguistics)StatisticsMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceSpline interpolationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Suppression of noise from recorded signals is a critically important data processing step for biomechanical analyses. While a wide variety of filtering or smoothing spline methods are available, the majority of these are not well suited for the analysis of signals with rapidly changing derivatives such as the processing of motion data for impact-like events. This is because commonly used low-pass filtering approaches or smoothing splines typically assume a single fixed cut-off frequency or regularization penalty which fails to describe rapid changes in the underlying function. To overcome these limitations we examine a class of adaptive penalized splines (APS) that extend commonly used penalized spline smoothers by inferring temporal adaptations in regularization penalty from observed data. Three variations of APS are examined in which temporal variation of spline penalization is described via either a series of independent random variables, an autoregressive process or a smooth cubic spline. Comparing the performance of APS on simulated datasets is promising with APS reducing RMSE by 48%-183% compared to a widely used Butterworth filtering approach. When inferring acceleration from noisy measurements describing the position of a pendulum impacting a barrier we observe between a 13% (independent variables) to 28% (spline) reduction in RMSE when compared to a 4th order Butterworth filter with optimally selected cut-off frequency. In addition to considerable improvement in RMSE, APS can provide estimates of uncertainty for fitted curves and generated quantities such as peak accelerations or durations of stationary periods. As a result, we suggest that researchers should consider the use of APS if features such as impact peaks, rates of loading, or periods of negligible acceleration are of interest.

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)0.002
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 score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.853

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.195
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of BiomechanicsSame topicVeterinary Equine Medical ResearchFrench-language works237,207