MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6907108404 · doi:10.21227/cwt2-2554

Measurement and Evaluation of Human Sitting and Standing Movement Biomechanics

2020· dataset· en· W6907108404 on OpenAlex

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 DataPort · 2020
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiomechanicsInverse dynamicsGround reaction forceAnkleExoskeletonKinematicsTorqueWork (physics)Joint (building)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although regenerative actuators can extend the operating durations of robotic lower-limb exoskeletons and prostheses, these energy-efficient powertrains have been exclusively designed and evaluated for level-ground walking. Building on previous research, we analyzed the lower-limb joint mechanical power during stand-to-sit movements using inverse dynamics modelling and simulation to estimate the biomechanical energy available for electrical regeneration during activities more representative of aging and rehabilitation populations. Nine subjects performed 20 sitting and standing movements while lower-limb kinematics and ground reaction forces were measured. Subject-specific body segment parameters were estimated using parameter identification, whereby differences in ground reaction forces and moments between the experimental measurements and inverse dynamic simulations were minimized. Joint mechanical power was calculated from net joint torques and rotational velocities and numerically integrated over time to determine joint biomechanical energy. The hip generated the largest peak negative mechanical power (1.8 ± 0.5 W/kg), followed by the knee (0.8 ± 0.3 W/kg) and ankle (0.2 ± 0.1 W/kg). Negative mechanical work from the hip, knee, and ankle joints per stand-to-sit movement were 0.35 ± 0.06 J/kg, 0.15 ± 0.08 J/kg, and 0.02 ± 0.01 J/kg, respectively. Assuming 80-kg bodyweight and previously published regenerative actuator efficiencies (i.e., maximum 63%), robotic lower-limb exoskeletons and prostheses could theoretically regenerate ~26 Joules of electrical energy while sitting down, compared to ~19 Joules during level-ground walking. Future research should focus on activity tracking and biomechanical analyses of seniors and rehabilitation patients to better estimate the biomechanical energy available for electrical regeneration among individuals with mobility impairments.Reference:Laschowski B, Razavian RS, and McPhee J. (2020). Simulation of Stand-to-Sit Biomechanics for Design of Lower-Limb Exoskeletons and Prostheses with Energy Regeneration. Under Review.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE DataPortFrench-language works237,207