2020
DOI: 10.1101/2020.12.29.424030
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Estimation of Kinematics from Inertial Measurement Units Using a Combined Deep Learning and Optimization Framework

Abstract: The difficulty of estimating joint kinematics remains a critical barrier toward widespread use of inertial measurement units in biomechanics. Traditional sensor-fusion filters are largely reliant on magnetometer readings, which may be disturbed in uncontrolled environments. Careful sensor-to-segment alignment and calibration strategies are also necessary, which may burden users and lead to further error in uncontrolled settings. We introduce a new framework that combines deep learning and top-down optimization… Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In [24], five IMU sensors were used to estimate kinematics in walking and running on a treadmill using a deep model based on convolutional and long-short term memory recurrent layers (DeepConvLSTM) with mean absolute errors ranging from 2.2°to 5.1°. More recently, in [25], the authors combined deep learning and optimization frameworks to estimate 3D kinematics using seven IMU sensors for walking and running, achieving an RMSE of 1.27°( ± 0.38°) for knee flexion/extension. However, because they only validated their study with simulated IMU data, it is unclear how their method will perform using real IMU data.…”
Section: A Imu and Machine Learning-based Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In [24], five IMU sensors were used to estimate kinematics in walking and running on a treadmill using a deep model based on convolutional and long-short term memory recurrent layers (DeepConvLSTM) with mean absolute errors ranging from 2.2°to 5.1°. More recently, in [25], the authors combined deep learning and optimization frameworks to estimate 3D kinematics using seven IMU sensors for walking and running, achieving an RMSE of 1.27°( ± 0.38°) for knee flexion/extension. However, because they only validated their study with simulated IMU data, it is unclear how their method will perform using real IMU data.…”
Section: A Imu and Machine Learning-based Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For both RMSE and correlation, the base and intermediate model ranges were wider in the slope and stair conditions but more narrow for the treadmill and overground conditions. 19.25%, and 17.72% for the same conditions. In terms of Pearson correlation coefficients, the intermediate models saw an increase in correlation of 0.41%, 0.54%, 0.78%, 1.18%, 0.90%, and 1.20% while DeepBBWAE-Net had an increase of 0.82%, 1.19%, 1.89%, 2.62%, 1.89%, and 2.78% for the six walking conditions.…”
Section: Table III Hyperparameters Of the Base Modelsmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…In [18], five IMU sensors were used to estimate kinematics in walking and running on a treadmill. More recently, in [19], a combined deep learning and optimization framework was proposed to estimate 3D kinematics using seven IMU sensors for walking and running. These studies have used a relatively large set of sensors and were only conducted on treadmill or overground conditions.…”
Section: A Imu and Machine Learning-based Approachmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…While both studies used an LSTM model architecture, the current study required significantly fewer experimental observations to achieve an equivalent level of prediction accuracy. Rapp et al predicted hip and knee joint angles during gait in 420 subjects using an LSTM model coupled with an optimization algorithm to account for differences in the predicted and measured segment rotational velocities [ 42 ]. When evaluated on simulated IMU data, the combined algorithm achieved an RMSE of 4.2° at the knee and 4.1° at the hip prior to a calibration step, which further improved the accuracy.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%