Dynamic Musculo-skeletal Model For FES-aided Gait Applications

Author(s):  
Durfee ◽  
Chiou ◽  
Beck
Keyword(s):  
2021 ◽  
pp. 111684
Author(s):  
A.G. Nouri ◽  
H. Babaee ◽  
P. Givi ◽  
H.K. Chelliah ◽  
D. Livescu

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Trent M. Guess ◽  
Swithin Razu ◽  
Amirhossein Jahandar ◽  
Marjorie Skubic ◽  
Zhiyu Huo

The Microsoft Kinect is becoming a widely used tool for inexpensive, portable measurement of human motion, with the potential to support clinical assessments of performance and function. In this study, the relative osteokinematic Cardan joint angles of the hip and knee were calculated using the Kinect 2.0 skeletal tracker. The pelvis segments of the default skeletal model were reoriented and 3-dimensional joint angles were compared with a marker-based system during a drop vertical jump and a hip abduction motion. Good agreement between the Kinect and marker-based system were found for knee (correlation coefficient = 0.96, cycle RMS error = 11°, peak flexion difference = 3°) and hip (correlation coefficient = 0.97, cycle RMS = 12°, peak flexion difference = 12°) flexion during the landing phase of the drop vertical jump and for hip abduction/adduction (correlation coefficient = 0.99, cycle RMS error = 7°, peak flexion difference = 8°) during isolated hip motion. Nonsagittal hip and knee angles did not correlate well for the drop vertical jump. When limited to activities in the optimal capture volume and with simple modifications to the skeletal model, the Kinect 2.0 skeletal tracker can provide limited 3-dimensional kinematic information of the lower limbs that may be useful for functional movement assessment.


2016 ◽  
Vol 2016.22 (0) ◽  
pp. _OS1406-1_-_OS1406-2_
Author(s):  
Togo MATOBA ◽  
Kazunori HASE ◽  
Yuichiro HAYASHI ◽  
SungHyek KIM

2009 ◽  
Vol 2009 (0) ◽  
pp. 197-200
Author(s):  
Aikihisa NINOMIYA ◽  
Kazunori HASE ◽  
Susumu OTA ◽  
Goro OBINATA ◽  
Daisuke KAJI

Kybernetes ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (9) ◽  
pp. 1578-1587
Author(s):  
Paul Pangaro

Purpose In an ideal situation, the author would like to answer each of the following questions: What is Conversation? What is Theory? What is Conversation Theory, anyhow? How did it arise? Who participated? How is it a theory? Where did it end up? Is it interesting? How might it be useful? Where has it been applied? Why should you care? What does it offer the practice of education? Of design? Of ethics? Where is it headed? (Sorry, steering joke, since Conversation Theory is situated in cybernetics, the art of steering). The purpose of this paper is to answer as many of these questions as practical. Design/methodology/approach The seeds of Conversation Theory lie in Gordon Pask’s instincts and in his “making”. This paper begins by describing some of the machinery he constructed to explore human interaction. Next, a skeletal model of conversation is offered, and connections to Pask’s own diagrams are drawn. Complementary to these models of the structure of conversations are their consequences, which are described in broad terms rather than given in detail. Lastly, Pask’s approach to proposing a scientific theory, and his means of achieving it, are explained. Originality/value Conversation Theory is a thoroughly original body of work, unmatched by its range and specificity. It is little known and yet potentially profound, with a scope that has already influenced educational psychology, second-order cybernetics, knowledge modeling and software design. By describing its origins, models and implications, the author hopes its value can be extended to new generations and to new domains.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document