MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

New Gait Representation Maps for Enhanced Recognition in Clinical Gait Analysis

2025· article· en· W4415402297 on OpenAlexaff
Nagwan Abdel Samee, Mohammed A. Al‐masni, Eman N. Marzban, Abobakr Khalil Al-Shamiri, Mugahed A. Al–antari, Maali Alabdulhafith, Noha F. Mahmoud, Yasser M. Kadah

Bibliographic record

VenueBioengineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGait Recognition and Analysis
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersDeanship of Scientific Research, Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman UniversityPrincess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman University
KeywordsGaitSilhouetteGait analysisRepresentation (politics)Pattern recognition (psychology)Reliability (semiconductor)Motion (physics)Binary number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gait analysis is essential in the evaluation of neuromuscular and musculoskeletal disorders; however, traditional approaches based on expert visual observation remain subjective and often lack consistency. Accurate and objective assessment of gait impairments is critical for early diagnosis, monitoring rehabilitation progress, and guiding clinical decision-making. Although Gait Energy Images (GEI) have become widely used in automated, vision-based gait analysis, they are limited in capturing boundary details and time-resolved motion dynamics, both critical for robust clinical interpretation. To overcome these limitations, we introduce four novel gait representation maps: the time-coded gait boundary image (tGBI), color-coded GEI (cGEI), time-coded gait delta image (tGDI), and color-coded boundary-to-image transform (cBIT). These representations are specifically designed to embed spatial, temporal, and boundary-specific features of the gait cycle, and are constructed from binary silhouette sequences through straightforward yet effective transformations that preserve key structural and dynamic information. Experiments on the INIT GAIT dataset demonstrate that the proposed representations consistently outperform the conventional GEI across multiple machine learning models and classification tasks involving different numbers of gait impairment categories (four and six classes). These findings highlight the potential of the proposed approaches to enhance the accuracy and reliability of automated clinical gait analysis.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.279 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioengineeringSame topicGait Recognition and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207