The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Leveraging high-density EMG to investigate bipolar electrode placement for gait prediction models
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1109/thms.2024.3371099 · Paper page
Abstract
For the control of wearable robotics, it is critical to obtain a prediction of the user’s motion intent with high accuracy. Electromyography (EMG) recordings have often been used as inputs for these devices, however bipolar EMG electrodes are highly sensitive to their location. Positional shifts of electrodes after training gait prediction models can therefore result in severe performance degradation. This study uses high-density EMG electrodes to simulate various bipolar electrode signals from four leg muscles during steady-state walking. The bipolar signals were ranked based on the consistency of the corresponding EMG envelope’s activity and timing across gait cycles. The locations were then compared by evaluating the performance of an offline Temporal Convolutional Network (TCN) that mapped EMG signals to knee angles. The results showed that electrode locations with consistent EMG envelopes resulted in greater prediction accuracy compared to hand-aligned placements (p<0.01). However, performance gains through this process were limited, and did not resolve the position shift issue. Instead of training a model for a single location, we showed that randomly sampling bipolar combinations across the high-density EMG grid during training mitigated this effect. Models trained with this method generalised over all positions, and achieved 70% less prediction error than location specific models over the entire area of the grid. Therefore, the use of high-density EMG grids to build training datasets could enable the development of models robust to spatial variations, and reduce the impact of muscle-specific electrode placement on accuracy.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Temporal Convolutional Networks for Action Segmentation and Detection
Lea, C., Flynn, M. D., Vidal, R., Reiter, A., & Hager, G. D. (2017) · 2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) · doi:10.1109/cvpr.2017.113 · Cited by 2,238
Flagged first, then by citations
Metadata
- Authors
- Hodossy, B., Guez, A., Jing, S., Huo, W., Vaidyanathan, R., & Farina, D.
- Affiliations
- Imperial College London
- Imperial College London (GB)
- Nankai University (CN)
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems
- Published
- 2023-09-07
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 192-201
- ISSN
- 2168-2291 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4392902505
- Cited by
- 10
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4
- FWCI
- 1.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- UK Research and Innovation (EP/S023283/1))
- Imperial College London
- UK Dementia Research Institute
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/S02249X/1)
- 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
- high-density surface electromyography, gait prediction, knee angle estimation, temporal convolutional network, training data generation, gait cycle
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