MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408808752 · doi:10.1080/14763141.2025.2481164

Wearable-based estimation of continuous 3D knee moments during running using a convolutional neural network

2025· article· en· W4408808752 on OpenAlexaff
Lucas Höschler, Christina Halmich, Christoph Schranz, Julian Fritz, Saša Čigoja, Martin Ullrich, Anne D. Koelewijn, Hermann Schwameder

Bibliographic record

VenueSports Biomechanics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
Canadian institutionsAdidas (Canada)
FundersSalzburger Landesregierung
KeywordsSagittal planeConvolutional neural networkCoronal planeIntraclass correlationComputer scienceMathematicsSimulationArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMedicineReproducibility

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to develop and validate a machine learning method to estimate continuous 3D knee moments during running from wearable sensor data. Reference knee moments were calculated from 19 recreational runners during treadmill running at varying slopes (0 ± 5 % incline), speeds (self-selected ± 1 km/h) and in 3 types of footwear. A convolutional neural network was trained on data from 7 inertial measuring units (feet, shanks, thighs, sacrum) and a pair of pressure insoles. We assessed performance over continuous time windows (CONT) and during stance phases (PHSS) by intraclass-correlation (ICC), normalised root mean squared error (nRMSE), and statistical parametric mapping. The agreement levels in the sagittal plane were good to excellent (ICC: 0.84-0.98), with low errors (nRMSE: 0.05-0.11). However, accuracy was lower for non-sagittal estimations (frontal ICC: 0.19-0.90, nRMSE: 0.08-0.23; transverse ICC: 0.72-0.94, nRMSE: 0.07-0.17). Accuracy decreased across all planes during PHSS. The proposed approach yields similar or better accuracy compared to previous work while requiring less preprocessing. It provides a viable method for wearable-based assessment of running kinetics in near real-time. Additional data and methods to address inter-individual variability could improve its precision in assessing frontal plane injury risk factors.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSports BiomechanicsSame topicLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesFrench-language works237,207