MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399624640 · doi:10.3390/app14125137

AI-Enhanced Prediction of Peak Rate of Torque Development from Accelerometer Signals

2024· article· en· W4399624640 on OpenAlexaff
Victor Rodrigues Amaral Cossich, Larry Katz, Conrado Torres Laett

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSports Performance and Training
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccelerometerArtificial neural networkComputer scienceIsometric exerciseTorqueArtificial intelligenceMachine learningMedicinePhysical therapyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the use of accelerometer signals as the predictors of Rate of Torque Development (RTD) using an artificial neural network (ANN) prediction model. Sixteen physically active men participated (29 ± 5 years), performing explosive isometric contractions while acceleration (ACC) signals were measured. The dataset, comprising ACC signals and corresponding RTD values, was split into training and testing (70–30%) sets for ANN training. The trained model predicted the peak RTD values from the ACC signal inputs. The measured and predicted peak RTD values were compared, with no significant differences observed (p = 0.852). A strong linear fit (R² = 0.81), ICC = 0.94 (p < 0.001), and a mean bias of 30.8 Nm/s demonstrated almost perfect agreement between measures. The study demonstrates the feasibility of using accelerometer data to predict peak RTD, offering a portable and cost-effective method compared to traditional equipment. The ANN prediction model provides a reliable means of estimating RTD from ACC signals, potentially enhancing accessibility to RTD assessment in sports and rehabilitation settings. The findings support the use of ANN models for predicting RTD, highlighting the potential of AI in developing performance analysis tools.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicSports Performance and TrainingFrench-language works237,207