Detecting Slipping-Like Perturbations by Using Adaptive Oscillators
- 364 Downloads
This study introduces a novel algorithm to detect unexpected slipping-like perturbations based on the comparison between actual leg joint angles and those predicted by a pool of adaptive oscillators. The approach grounds on the hypothesis that during postural transitions, the difference between these datasets diverges and can early signal that the dynamic balance is challenged. To test this hypothesis, leg joint angles of twelve healthy young participants were recorded while undergoing four different perturbations delivered during steady locomotion. Joint angles were estimated after spanning the whole domain of the adaptive oscillator dynamics. Results confirmed that the implemented strategy allows to early detect a postural transition induced by a slipping-like perturbation: the best performance is represented by a mean detection time ranging between 150 and 250 ms and a low rate (lower than 10%) of false alarms. On the whole, the proposed approach is efficient even if it is based on a quite simple threshold-based algorithm. Moreover, it does not need any falling-based training before being implemented, is not computationally heavy, and is not subject dependent. Finally, since it is based on leg joint angles, it appears well suited to be implemented in lower-limb orthoses/prostheses already equipped with joint position sensors.
KeywordsPre-fall detection Adaptive oscillators Perturbation Walking Joint angles Threshold algorithm
This work was supported by the European Union within the CYBERLEGs (The CYBERnetic LowEr-Limb CoGnitive Ortho-prosthesis, ICT 287894) and the I-DONT-FALL (Integrated prevention and Detection sOlutioNs Tailored to the population and Risk Factors associated with FALLs, CIP-ICT-PSP-2011-5-297225) projects.
- 2.Bassi Luciani, L., V. Genovese, V. Monaco, L. Odetti, E. Cattin, and S. Micera. Design and evaluation of a new mechatronic platform for assessment and prevention of fall risks. J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. 9:51, 2012.Google Scholar
- 3.Becker, C., L. Schwickert, S. Mellone, F. Bagala, L. Chiari, J. L. Helbostad, W. Zijlstra, K. Aminian, A. Bourke, C. Todd, S. Bandinelli, N. Kerse, and J. Klenk. Proposal for a multiphase fall model based on real-world fall recordings with body-fixed sensors. Z. Gerontol. Geriatr. 45:707–715.Google Scholar
- 5.Borghese, N. A., L. Bianchi, and F. Lacquaniti. Kinematic determinants of human locomotion. J. Physiol. 494(Pt 3):863–879, 1996.Google Scholar
- 6.Davis R. B. III, S. Õunpuu, D. Tyburski, and J. R. Gage. A gait analysis data collection and reduction technique. Hum. Mov. Sci. 10:575–587, 1991.Google Scholar
- 15.Martelli, D., V. Monaco, L. Bassi Luciani, and S. Micera. Angular momentum during unexpected multidirectional perturbations delivered while walking. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 60:1785–1795, 2013.Google Scholar
- 20.Monaco, V., L. A. Rinaldi, G. Macrì, and S. Micera. During walking elders increase efforts at proximal joints and keep low kinetics at the ankle. Clin. Biomech. (Bristol, Avon) 24:493–508, 2009.Google Scholar
- 23.Ronsse, R., T. Lenzi, N. Vitiello, B. Koopman, E. van Asseldonk, S. M. M. De Rossi, J. van den Kieboom, H. van der Kooij, M. C. Carrozza, and A. J. Ijspeert. Oscillator-based assistance of cyclical movements: model-based and model-free approaches. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 49:1173–1185, 2011.Google Scholar
- 24.Shiratori, T., and M. Latash. The roles of proximal and distal muscles in anticipatory postural adjustments under asymmetrical perturbations and during standing on rollerskates. Clin. Neurophysiol. 111:613–23, 2000.Google Scholar
- 27.Wu, G., F. C. T. Van Der Helm, H. E. J. Veeger, M. Makhsous, P. Van Roy, C. Anglin, J. Nagels, A. R. Karduna, K. McQuade, X. Wang, F. W. Werner, and B. Buchholz. ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate systems of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion-part II: shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand. J. Biomech. 38:981–992, 2005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar