2016 38th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) 2016
DOI: 10.1109/embc.2016.7591044
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Realistic motor unit placement in a cylindrical HD-sEMG generation model

Abstract: The aim of this work is to assess an automatic optimized algorithm for the positioning of the Motor Units (MUs) within a multilayered cylindrical High Density surface EMG (HD-sEMG) generation model representing a skeletal muscle. The multilayered cylinder is composed of three layers: muscle, adipose and skin tissues. For this purpose, two different algorithms will be compared: an unconstrained random and a Mitchell's Best Candidate (MBC) placements, both with uniform distribution for the MUs positions. These a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Surface EMG signals were generated for different muscle cross-sectional area morphologies (circle, ring, pizza, and ellipse) and regionalization levels (no regionalization, medium level of regionalization, and high level of regionalization). The method for MU regionalization was based on a previous study 2 . Force-EMG relations were computed for each condition, and the best fit between the simulation outcomes and an experimental data 3 was calculated using the coefficient of determination (R 2 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Surface EMG signals were generated for different muscle cross-sectional area morphologies (circle, ring, pizza, and ellipse) and regionalization levels (no regionalization, medium level of regionalization, and high level of regionalization). The method for MU regionalization was based on a previous study 2 . Force-EMG relations were computed for each condition, and the best fit between the simulation outcomes and an experimental data 3 was calculated using the coefficient of determination (R 2 ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Those parts of MU territories that exceed the muscle territory must be cut off, and the question remains how to account for this loss in MU territory. Several approaches to solving the problem are conceivable (Rodriguez-Falces et al, 2012; Carriou et al, 2016b): All fibers belonging to the MU are placed in the remaining parts of the MU territory. This approach leads to an increase in the fiber density of boundary MUs, and hence also in the overall fiber density toward the muscle boundaries.The number of fibers innervated by the MU is reduced proportionally.…”
Section: Mathematical Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach keeps the number of fibers and the fiber density at the desired values but likely leads to strongly increased overall fiber density toward the muscle center, due to many adjusted MU regions overlapping there.MUs with territories exceeding the muscle territory are rejected completely. This approach obviously removes the need for MU property adjustments, but without further modifications leads to reduced overall fiber density close to the muscle boundaries (Carriou et al, 2016b). …”
Section: Mathematical Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Moreover, possible MU area superposition is also considered in the model. For this purpose, we used a contrained random algorithm presented in [10] which gives more realistic MUs positioning within the muscle. Moreover, boundaries of the muscle are fixed to mimic the Biceps Brachii muscle using MRI technique [11].…”
Section: Motor Unit and Fibers Specificationsmentioning
confidence: 99%