MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4400748404 · doi:10.1101/2024.07.11.603119

Big Data in Myoelectric Control: Large Multi-User Models Enable Robust Zero-Shot EMG-based Discrete Gesture Recognition

2024· preprint· en· W4400748404 on OpenAlexaff
Ethan Eddy, Evan Campbell, Scott Bateman, Erik Scheme

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceZero (linguistics)GestureGesture recognitionControl (management)Speech recognitionPattern recognition (psychology)Shot (pellet)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Myoelectric control, the use of electromyogram (EMG) signals generated during muscle contractions to control a system or device, is a promising modality for enabling always-available control of emerging ubiquitous computing applications. However, its widespread use has historically been limited by the need for user-specific machine learning models because of behavioural and physiological differences between users. Leveraging the publicly available 612-user EMG-EPN612 dataset, this work dispels this notion, showing that true zero-shot cross-user myoelectric control is achievable without user-specific training. By taking a discrete approach to classification (i.e., recognizing the entire dynamic gesture as a single event), a classification accuracy of 93.0% for six gestures was achieved on a set of 306 unseen users (who provided no training data), showing that big data approaches (compared to most EMG studies, which typically employ only 10-20 users) can enable robust cross-user myoelectric control. By organizing the results into a series of mini-studies, this work provides an in-depth analysis of discrete cross-user models to answer unknown questions and uncover new research directions. In particular, this work explores the number of participants required to build cross-user models, the impact of transfer learning for fine-tuning these models, and the effects of under-represented end-user demographics in the training data, among other issues. Additionally, in order to further evaluate the performance of the created cross-user models, a completely new data set was created (using the same recording device) that includes known covariate factors such as cross-day use and limb-position variability. The results show that the large data models can effectively generalize to new datasets and mitigate the impact of common confounding factors that have historically limited the adoption of EMG-based inputs.

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)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→