MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412843036 · doi:10.37190/abb/207865

Estimating Dynamic Plantar Pressure Distribution from Wearable Inertial Sensors Using a Hybrid CNN-BiLSTM Architecture

2025· article· en· W4412843036 on OpenAlexaff
Yihan Qian, Dong Sun, Enze Shao, Yang Song, József Sárosi, István Bíró, Zixiang Gao, Yaodong Gu

Bibliographic record

VenueActa of Bioengineering and Biomechanics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWinter Sports Injuries and Performance
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory ServicesUniversity of Calgary
FundersK. C. Wong Magna Fund in Ningbo UniversityNatural Science Foundation of NingboNingbo University
KeywordsWearable computerArchitectureComputer scienceInertial measurement unitTextileInertial frame of referencePlantar pressurePressure sensorArtificial intelligencePattern recognition (psychology)EngineeringEmbedded systemMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringGeographyPhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Plantar pressure distribution is a crucial indicator in gait analysis, with significant value in clinical diagnoses and sports optimization. Traditional measurement methods, however, are often limited by expensive equipment and laboratory settings. This study aimed to develop an accurate, portable, and cost-effective method using a deep learning model based on data from wearable Inertial Measurement Units to predict comprehensive plantar pressure distributions. Methods This study aims to develop a portable deep learning model based on Inertial Measurement Units data to predict plantar pressure distribution. We propose a model that combines Convolutional Neural Network and Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory, where Convolutional Neural Network extracts local features from Inertial Measurement Units data, Bidirectional Long Short-Term Memory captures the temporal dependencies of the gait cycle, an attention mechanism optimizes the prediction of key time steps, and body weight information is integrated to accommodate individual differences. Results Experimental results show that in 10-fold cross-validation, the model achieves a Mean Squared Error of 0.98 and a Structural Similarity Index of 0.89, demonstrating excellent prediction accuracy and distribution similarity. Conclusions This study provides a cost-effective method for plantar pressure analysis, which is expected to be integrated into wearable devices for real-time gait monitoring, with applications in rehabilitation and sports optimization.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.527

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueActa of Bioengineering and BiomechanicsSame topicWinter Sports Injuries and PerformanceFrench-language works237,207