MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414684052 · doi:10.1038/s44334-025-00055-8

Computationally tuned dual-layer lattice pads adapted to gait-induced pressure distribution

2025· article· en· W4414684052 on OpenAlexaff
Zhenghui Lu, Xin Li, Dong Sun, Yang Song, Gusztáv Fekete, András Kovács, Zixiang Gao, Jianjun Zheng, Liangliang Xiang, Yaodong Gu

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Advanced Manufacturing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Materials and Mechanics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Science Foundation of NingboK. C. Wong Magna Fund in Ningbo UniversityNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaChina Scholarship CouncilSzéchenyi István EgyetemNingbo University
KeywordsBayesian optimizationScalabilityFinite element methodParametric statisticsForefootLattice (music)Genetic algorithmEngineering design processGaussian process

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patients with Becker muscular dystrophy (BMD) often experience forefoot overload due to abnormal gait patterns, resulting in chronic pain, instability, and ulceration. Conventional orthotic devices frequently fail to accommodate the complex and individualized biomechanical needs of these patients. Here, we introduce a computational framework that integrates finite element analysis, machine learning, and Bayesian optimization to design dual-layer lattice pads adapted to gait-induced pressure distribution. A Gaussian Process Regression model accurately predicted structure–function relationships, enabling efficient multi-objective optimization within a high-dimensional design space. The optimized lattice configuration reduced peak plantar pressure by 51.36% during simulated gait, outperforming previous solutions. Unlike conventional uniform-stiffness insoles, the dual-layer architecture allows gradient mechanical tuning through parametric control, providing enhanced pressure offloading and structural adaptability. This work proposes a computationally scalable and theoretically generalizable framework for precision orthotic design and outlines a pathway for integrating computational biomechanics with AI-informed material engineering in future personalized rehabilitation technologies.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Advanced ManufacturingSame topicAdvanced Materials and MechanicsFrench-language works237,207