2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.bspc.2021.103134
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analyzing the impact of class transitions on the design of pattern recognition-based myoelectric control schemes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although LDA was the most promising baseline classifier, in line with findings from our previous study [13], it does not benefit as much from the rejection schemes, particularly DCIR and VoCIR, as compared to the LSTM and SVM. This can be attributed to the significant overlap in confidence value distributions of the LDA corresponding to the different types of decisions (correct, incorrect, and transitions).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Although LDA was the most promising baseline classifier, in line with findings from our previous study [13], it does not benefit as much from the rejection schemes, particularly DCIR and VoCIR, as compared to the LSTM and SVM. This can be attributed to the significant overlap in confidence value distributions of the LDA corresponding to the different types of decisions (correct, incorrect, and transitions).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…The data collection protocol used in this study was similar to the one used in our previous work, with some added elements [13]. Each training record included a set of 6 ramp contractions starting from a neutral position and ending with a 3 s steady state contraction in Wrist Flexion (WF), Wrist Extension (WE), Wrist Pronation (WP), Wrist Supination (WS), Chuck Grip (CG), or Hand Open (HO).…”
Section: B Training and Testing Protocolmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Within this paradigm, algorithms are typically trained to predict steady-state static contractions, whereby the underlying EMG of the gesture is not intentionally changing over time. With some exceptions [28], the signal is generally assumed to be stationary and any transient periods are not specifically modeled [26,29]. Due to the prevalence and the original emergence of EMG research for prosthesis control, most gesture recognition research, including confounding factors research, continues to focus on improving these systems [1].…”
Section: Continuous Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%