Where to mount the IMU? Validation of joint angle kinematics and sensor selection for activities of daily living

Lena Uhlenberg, Oliver Amft
{"title":"Where to mount the IMU? Validation of joint angle kinematics and sensor selection for activities of daily living","authors":"Lena Uhlenberg, Oliver Amft","doi":"10.3389/fcomp.2024.1347424","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We validate the OpenSense framework for IMU-based joint angle estimation and furthermore analyze the framework's ability for sensor selection and optimal positioning during activities of daily living (ADL). Personalized musculoskeletal models were created from anthropometric data of 19 participants. Quaternion coordinates were derived from measured IMU data and served as input to the simulation framework. Six ADLs, involving upper and lower limbs were measured and a total of 26 angles analyzed. We compared the joint kinematics of IMU-based simulations with those of optical marker-based simulations for most important angles per ADL. Additionally, we analyze the influence of sensor count on estimation performance and deviations between joint angles, and derive the best sensor combinations. We report differences in functional range of motion (fRoMD) estimation performance. Results for IMU-based simulations showed MAD, RMSE, and fRoMD of 4.8°, 6.6°, 7.2° for lower limbs and for lower limbs and 9.2°, 11.4°, 13.8° for upper limbs depending on the ADL. Overall, sagittal plane movements (flexion/extension) showed lower median MAD, RMSE, and fRoMD compared to transversal and frontal plane movements (rotations, adduction/abduction). Analysis of sensor selection showed that after three sensors for the lower limbs and four sensors for the complex shoulder joint, the estimation error decreased only marginally. Global optimum (lowest RMSE) was obtained for five to eight sensors depending on the joint angle across all ADLs. The sensor combinations with the minimum count were a subset of the most frequent sensor combinations within a narrowed search space of the 5% lowest error range across all ADLs and participants. Smallest errors were on average < 2° over all joint angles. Our results showed that the open-source OpenSense framework not only serves as a valid tool for realistic representation of joint kinematics and fRoM, but also yields valid results for IMU sensor selection for a comprehensive set of ADLs involving upper and lower limbs. The results can help researchers to determine appropriate sensor positions and sensor configurations without the need for detailed biomechanical knowledge.","PeriodicalId":510141,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Computer Science","volume":"14 19","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Computer Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomp.2024.1347424","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We validate the OpenSense framework for IMU-based joint angle estimation and furthermore analyze the framework's ability for sensor selection and optimal positioning during activities of daily living (ADL). Personalized musculoskeletal models were created from anthropometric data of 19 participants. Quaternion coordinates were derived from measured IMU data and served as input to the simulation framework. Six ADLs, involving upper and lower limbs were measured and a total of 26 angles analyzed. We compared the joint kinematics of IMU-based simulations with those of optical marker-based simulations for most important angles per ADL. Additionally, we analyze the influence of sensor count on estimation performance and deviations between joint angles, and derive the best sensor combinations. We report differences in functional range of motion (fRoMD) estimation performance. Results for IMU-based simulations showed MAD, RMSE, and fRoMD of 4.8°, 6.6°, 7.2° for lower limbs and for lower limbs and 9.2°, 11.4°, 13.8° for upper limbs depending on the ADL. Overall, sagittal plane movements (flexion/extension) showed lower median MAD, RMSE, and fRoMD compared to transversal and frontal plane movements (rotations, adduction/abduction). Analysis of sensor selection showed that after three sensors for the lower limbs and four sensors for the complex shoulder joint, the estimation error decreased only marginally. Global optimum (lowest RMSE) was obtained for five to eight sensors depending on the joint angle across all ADLs. The sensor combinations with the minimum count were a subset of the most frequent sensor combinations within a narrowed search space of the 5% lowest error range across all ADLs and participants. Smallest errors were on average < 2° over all joint angles. Our results showed that the open-source OpenSense framework not only serves as a valid tool for realistic representation of joint kinematics and fRoM, but also yields valid results for IMU sensor selection for a comprehensive set of ADLs involving upper and lower limbs. The results can help researchers to determine appropriate sensor positions and sensor configurations without the need for detailed biomechanical knowledge.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在哪里安装 IMU?验证关节角度运动学和日常生活活动传感器的选择
我们验证了基于 IMU 的关节角度估算 OpenSense 框架,并进一步分析了该框架在日常生活(ADL)活动中选择传感器和优化定位的能力。根据 19 名参与者的人体测量数据创建了个性化肌肉骨骼模型。四元数坐标来自测量的 IMU 数据,并作为模拟框架的输入。我们测量了涉及上肢和下肢的六个 ADL,并分析了总共 26 个角度。我们比较了基于 IMU 的模拟与基于光学标记的模拟在每个 ADL 最重要角度的关节运动学。此外,我们还分析了传感器数量对估计性能和关节角度偏差的影响,并得出了最佳传感器组合。我们报告了功能运动范围(fRoMD)估计性能的差异。基于 IMU 的模拟结果显示,根据 ADL 的不同,下肢的 MAD、RMSE 和 fRoMD 分别为 4.8°、6.6°、7.2°,上肢的 MAD、RMSE 和 fRoMD 分别为 9.2°、11.4°、13.8°。总体而言,与横向和额面运动(旋转、内收/外展)相比,矢状面运动(屈/伸)的中位数MAD、RMSE和fRoMD较低。对传感器选择的分析表明,在下肢使用三个传感器和复杂肩关节使用四个传感器后,估计误差仅略有减少。根据所有 ADL 关节角度的不同,5 至 8 个传感器可获得总体最佳值(均方根误差最小)。计数最小的传感器组合是在所有 ADL 和参与者中误差最小的 5%搜索空间内最常见传感器组合的子集。在所有关节角度中,最小误差平均小于 2°。我们的研究结果表明,开源的 OpenSense 框架不仅是真实呈现关节运动学和 fRoM 的有效工具,还能为涉及上肢和下肢的各种 ADL 提供有效的 IMU 传感器选择结果。这些结果可以帮助研究人员确定合适的传感器位置和传感器配置,而无需详细的生物力学知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Cybersecurity for Industry 5.0: trends and gaps Device-enabled neighborhood-slot allocation for the edge-oriented Internet of Things High-quality implementation for a continuous-in-time financial API in C# Editorial: HCI and worker well-being Extracting typing game keystroke patterns as potential indicators of programming aptitude
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1