Cited by 85Muscle activation and electromyography studiesProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsEEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces

Evaluating EMG feature and classifier selection for application to partial-hand prosthesis control

Open access
Adewuyi, Adenike A., Hargrove, Levi J., Kuiken, Todd A.·2016·Frontiers in Neurorobotics

Abstract

Pattern recognition-based myoelectric control of upper limb prostheses has the potential to restore control of multiple degrees of freedom. Though this control method has been extensively studied in individuals with higher-level amputations, few studies have investigated its effectiveness for individuals with partial-hand amputations. Most partial-hand amputees retain a functional wrist and the ability of pattern recognition-based methods to correctly classify hand motions from different wrist positions is not well studied. In this study, focusing on partial-hand amputees, we evaluate (1) the performance of non-linear and linear pattern recognition algorithms and (2) the performance of optimal EMG feature subsets for classification of four hand motion classes in different wrist positions for 16 non-amputees and 4 amputees. Our results show that linear discriminant analysis and linear and non-linear artificial neural networks perform significantly better than the quadratic discriminant analysis for both non-amputees and partial-hand amputees. For amputees, including information from multiple wrist positions significantly decreased error (p<0.001) but no further significant decrease in error occurred when more than 4, 2, or 3 positions were included for the extrinsic (p=0.07), intrinsic (p=0.06), or combined extrinsic and intrinsic muscle EMG (p=0.08), respectively. Finally, we found that a feature set determined by selecting optimal features from each channel outperformed the commonly used time domain (p<0.001) and time domain/autoregressive feature sets (p<0.01). This method can be used as a screening filter to select the features from each channel that provide the best classification of hand postures across different wrist positions.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3389/fnbot.2016.00015

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Pattern recognition control of myoelectric prostheses is getting popularity due to better classification of EMG signals using various methods.

    “Pattern recognition control of myoelectric prostheses is also getting popularity due to its better classification of EMG signals (user intentions) using various methods, i.e., linear discriminant analysis classifier, tacit learning system, deep learning with convolutional neural network (Adewuyi et al., 2016; Atzori et al., 2016; Fani et al., 2016; Oyama et al., 2016), etc.”

    From Selectivity and Longevity of Peripheral-Nerve and Machine Interfaces: A Review. (2017) · cites this paper as Adewuyi et al., 2016

    The Introduction (page unavailable) describes LDA as a commonly used EMG classifier, and the Conclusion (page unavailable) reports improved classification from selecting EMG features. The paper does not establish that pattern-recognition prosthesis control is growing in popularity because of better classification; it also does not evaluate the tacit-learning or convolutional-network methods listed in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Uellendahl J. Tyler J. Hung K. (2016). “A case series study of pattern recognition for upper-limb prosthesis control,” in 2016 American Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists 42nd Academy Annual Meeting and Scientific Symposium, Orlando.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Adewuyi, A. A., Hargrove, L. J., & Kuiken, T. A.
Affiliations
Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Adewuyi, Adenike A.
Venue
Frontiers in Neurorobotics
Published
2016-10-19
Volume
10
Pages
15-15
ISSN
1662-5218 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2538120249
Cited by
85
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 5
FWCI
4.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Neurorobotics (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (90RE5014-02-00)
  • National Institutes of Health (T32 HD7418)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (1F31HD078092-01)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › EEG and Brain-Computer Interfaces
Keywords
myoelectric control, partial hand amputation, upper limb prosthesis, hand motion classification, wrist posture, linear discriminant analysis, artificial neural networks, quadratic discriminant analysis, autoregressive features, pattern recognition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review