MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411640001 · doi:10.1109/tmrb.2025.3583144

Genetic Algorithm-Optimized Feature Selection for sEMG-IMU Fusion Improves Intention Detection in AI-Driven Robotic Walking System

2025· article· en· W4411640001 on OpenAlex
Somayeh Hosseini, Arvin Samiei, Mojtaba Ahmadi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Medical Robotics and Bionics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric and Hybrid Vehicle Technologies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInertial measurement unitArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceFeature selectionGenetic algorithmSelection (genetic algorithm)Pattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Computer visionSensor fusionMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increasing demand for responsive and intuitive assistive walking devices, driven by an aging population, underscores the need for intelligent systems powered by emerging machine learning (ML) technologies. This study introduces a novel feature fusion framework based on the Nondominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm II (NSGA-II) to fuse surface electromyography (sEMG) signals with inertial measurement unit (IMU) data and a high-level control architecture, enabling accurate and robust motion intention detection for robotic assistive walking systems. The proposed feature fusion method consistently outperformed statistical filter-based techniques such as mutual information (MI), minimum redundancy maximum relevance (MRMR), correlation coefficient (CC), and Fisher score (FS). It significantly improved the classification metrics of random forest (RF), K-nearest neighbour (KNN), and support vector machine (SVM) classifiers across varying feature counts. For example, the feature fusion algorithm improved RF’s accuracy by 6.74%, 7.67%, 6.35%, and 3.60% and enhanced precision by 6.77%, 7.67%, 6.36%, and 3.61% relative to FS, CC, MRMR, and MI, respectively. Similarly, the algorithm increased RF’s recall by 6.79%, 7.71%, 6.38%, and 3.62%. The proposed feature fusion and high-level and low-level control frameworks were implemented on SoloWalk for real-time interaction, enabling participants to perform daily walking activities. Real-time validation confirmed system stability across gait patterns and user variations, demonstrating its effectiveness in assistive walking robots.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.748

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.213 · 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