MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402910893 · doi:10.1177/20556683241288226

Development of a low-cost upper-body rehabilitation robot for home use

2024· article· en· W4402910893 on OpenAlexafffund
David Breton, Thierry Laliberté, Alexandre Campeau‐Lecours

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWorkspaceRobotComputer scienceInterface (matter)SimulationHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inability to use one's hands or arms greatly restricts the ability to perform daily activities. After a developmental or acquired injury, the intensity and frequency of rehabilitation exercises are essential. To alleviate the burden on the healthcare system, robotic systems have been developed to support clinicians' interventions. However, these systems are often bulky and expensive, limiting their use to specific clinical settings and making them impractical for home use. This paper presents the development of an affordable and easy to install 2-DOF five-bar linkage robot designed to be used at home. This work aims to reduce the cost of the robot through actuation optimization, mechanical optimization and 3D printing. The architecture and links length are chosen to optimize the robot's performance in the required workspace. Using sensor feedback, impedance control algorithms and multiple types of exercise such as virtual walls guidance are implemented. Finally, a user interface was programmed to facilitate the robot's use.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies EngineeringSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207