ArticleFrontiers in neurorobotics2022
Comparison of machine learning and deep learning-based methods for locomotion mode recognition using a single inertial measurement unit.
Article in Frontiers in neurorobotics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Current Trends in Artificial Intelligence for Recognizing Work Postures to Prevent Work-Related Musculoskeletal Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis by Occupational Activity.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Article
- Predicting dyslipidemia incidence: unleashing machine learning algorithms on Lifestyle Promotion Project data.BMC public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Locomotion mode recognition provides the prosthesis control with the information on when to switch between different walking modes, whereas the gait phase detection indicates where we are in the gait cycle. But powered prostheses often implement a different control strategy for each locomotion mode to improve the functionality of the prosthesis. Existing studies employed several classical machine learning methods for locomotion mode recognition. However, these methods were less effective for data with complex decision boundaries and resulted in misclassifications of motion recognition. Deep learning-based methods potentially resolve these limitations as it is a special type of machine learning method with more sophistication. Therefore, this study evaluated three deep learning-based models for locomotion mode recognition, namely recurrent neural network (RNN), long short-term memory (LSTM) neural network, and convolutional neural network (CNN), and compared the recognition performance of deep learning models to the machine learning model with random forest classifier (RFC). The models are trained from data of one inertial measurement unit (IMU) placed on the lower shanks of four able-bodied subjects to perform four walking modes, including level ground walking (LW), standing (ST), and stair ascent/stair descent (SA/SD). The results indicated that CNN and LSTM models outperformed other models, and these models were promising for applying locomotion mode recognition in real-time for robotic prostheses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.