Evaluating Gait Symmetry with a Smart Robotic Walker: A Novel Approach to Mobility Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gait asymmetry, a consequence of various neurological or physical conditions such as aging and stroke, detrimentally impacts bipedal locomotion, causing biomechanical alterations, increasing the risk of falls and reducing quality of life. Addressing this critical issue, this paper introduces a novel diagnostic method for gait symmetry analysis through the use of an assistive robotic Smart Walker equipped with an innovative asymmetry detection scheme. This method analyzes sensor measurements capturing the interaction torque between user and walker. By applying a seasonal-trend decomposition tool, we isolate gait-specific patterns within these data, allowing for the estimation of stride durations and calculation of a symmetry index. Through experiments involving 5 experimenters, we demonstrate the Smart Walker’s capability in detecting and quantifying gait asymmetry by achieving an accuracy of 84.9% in identifying asymmetric cases in a controlled testing environment. Further analysis explores the classification of these asymmetries based on their underlying causes, providing valuable insights for gait assessment. The results underscore the potential of the device as a precise, ready-to-use monitoring tool for personalized rehabilitation, facilitating targeted interventions for enhanced patient outcomes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".