ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
A Systematic Evaluation of Feature Encoding Techniques for Gait Analysis Using Multimodal Sensory Data.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Subject-Level Classification of Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head from Wearable IMU Gait Data Using Multilevel Feature Fusion.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Retrospective Frailty Assessment in Older Adults Using Inertial Measurement Unit-Based Deep Learning on Gait Spectrograms.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Spatiotemporal Gait Asymmetries Remain Unaffected by Increased Load Carriage in Professional Intervention Police Officers.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Optimizing Fall Risk Diagnosis in Older Adults Using a Bayesian Classifier and Simulated Annealing.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 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.
Funding
Abstract
This paper addresses the problem of feature encoding for gait analysis using multimodal time series sensory data. In recent years, the dramatic increase in the use of numerous sensors, e.g., inertial measurement unit (IMU), in our daily wearable devices has gained the interest of the research community to collect kinematic and kinetic data to analyze the gait. The most crucial step for gait analysis is to find the set of appropriate features from continuous time series data to accurately represent human locomotion. This paper presents a systematic assessment of numerous feature extraction techniques. In particular, three different feature encoding techniques are presented to encode multimodal time series sensory data. In the first technique, we utilized eighteen different handcrafted features which are extracted directly from the raw sensory data. The second technique follows the Bag-of-Visual-Words model; the raw sensory data are encoded using a pre-computed codebook and a locality-constrained linear encoding (LLC)-based feature encoding technique. We evaluated two different machine learning algorithms to assess the effectiveness of the proposed features in the encoding of raw sensory data. In the third feature encoding technique, we proposed two end-to-end deep learning models to automatically extract the features from raw sensory data. A thorough experimental evaluation is conducted on four large sensory datasets and their outcomes are compared. A comparison of the recognition results with current state-of-the-art methods demonstrates the computational efficiency and high efficacy of the proposed feature encoding method. The robustness of the proposed feature encoding technique is also evaluated to recognize human daily activities. Additionally, this paper also presents a new dataset consisting of the gait patterns of 42 individuals, gathered using IMU sensors.
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.