Design and prototype validation of a laterally mounted powered hip joint prothesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prosthetic technology has advanced with the development of powered prostheses to enhance joint function and movement in the absence of native anatomy. However, there are no powered solutions available for hip-level amputees, and most existing hip prostheses are mounted to the front of the prosthetic socket, thereby limiting range of motion. This research introduces a novel laterally mounted powered hip joint (LMPHJ) that augments user movement. The LMPHJ is mounted on the lateral side of the prosthetic socket, positioning the hip joint closer to the anatomical center of rotation while ensuring user safety and stability. The motor and electronics are located in the thigh area, maintaining a low profile while transmitting the required hip moment to the mechanical joint center of rotation. A prototype was designed and manufactured, and static testing was complete by modifying the loading conditions defined in the ISO 15032:2000 standard to failure test levels for a 100 kg person, demonstrating the joint's ability to withstand everyday loading conditions. Functional testing was conducted using a prosthesis simulator that enabled able-bodied participants to successfully walk with the powered prosthesis on level ground. This validates the mechanical design for walking and indicates the LMPHJ is ready for evaluation in the next phase with hip disarticulation amputee participants.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".