MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405264005 · doi:10.47392/irjash.2024.051

Advanced Kinetic Activity and Physiotherapy Monitoring System Using CV and Deep Learning

2024· article· en· W4405264005 on OpenAlexaff
Mrs.S. Archanadevi, Viktor K. Prasanna, S Sibirani, K Swetha, D. Thenmozhi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Research Journal on Advanced Science Hub · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRehabilitationComputer sciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationMistakeTracking (education)SimulationArtificial intelligenceHuman–computer interactionPhysical therapyMedicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Advanced Kinetic Activity and Physiotherapy Monitoring System offers a cutting-edge approach to exercise and physiotherapy tracking by utilizing Computer Vision (CV) and Deep Learning. Manual observation is frequently used in traditional physiotherapy, which can be subjective and prone to human mistake. In order to increase assessment accuracy, this system provides real-time monitoring, automated tracking of physical activity, concentrating on important metrics including posture, joint angles, and gait patterns. Patients can complete exercises correctly without continual monitoring thanks to the system's ability to analyse live video feeds and Provide feedback on movement change at the end. By integrating the Exercise DB API, the system can anticipate particular workouts and provide comprehensive details about them in response to user input, enabling tailored instruction. User movements are evaluated during the "Predict Exercise" phase, and useful information is offered to enable therapeutic modifications and promote appropriate form. According to preliminary findings, this strategy greatly improves patient outcomes by enhancing the effectiveness and accessibility of physiotherapy and rehabilitation through remote monitoring and customized recommendations.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.629
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.423 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Research Journal on Advanced Science HubSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207