Combining Neural Networks for Gait Classification

  • Nigar Sen Koktas
  • Nese Yalabik
  • Gunes Yavuzer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4225)


Gait analysis can be defined as the numerical and graphical representation of the mechanical measurements of human walking patterns and is used for two main purposes: human identification, where it is usually applied to security issues, and clinical applications, where it is used for the non-automated and automated diagnosis of various abnormalities and diseases. Automated or semi-automated systems are important in assisting physicians for diagnosis of various diseases. In this study, a semi-automated gait classification system is designed and implemented by using joint angle and time-distance data as features. Multilayer Perceptrons (MLPs) Combination classifiers are used to categorize gait data into two categories; healthy and patient with knee osteoarthritis. Two popular approaches of combining neural networks are experimented and the results are compared according to different output combining rules. In the first one, same set is used to train all networks and afterwards the features are decomposed into five different sets. These two experiments show that using entire data set produces more accurate results than using decomposed data sets, but complexity becomes an important drawback. However, when a proper combining rule is applied to decomposed sets, results are more accurate than entire set. In this experiment sum rule produces better results than majority vote and max rules as an output combining rule.


Joint Angle Majority Vote Gait Analysis Gait Pattern Knee Joint Angle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Lee, L., Grimson, W.: Gait analysis for recognition and classification. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Face and Gesture Recognition (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beggy, R., Kamruzzaman, J.: A Comparison of Neural Networks and Support Vector Machines for Recognizing Young-Old Gait Patterns. In: Proceeding of IEEE TENCON Conference (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Davis, R.B., DeLuca, P.A., Romness, M.J.: Clinical Gait Analysis and Its Role in Treatment Decision-Making. Medscape General Medicine 1-1 (1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kohle, M., Merkl, D., Kastner, J.: Clinical gait analysis by neural networks: issues and experiences. In: Proceedings of the 10th IEEE Symposium on Computer-Based Medical Systems, p. 138 (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wu, W., Su, F., Cheng, Y., Chou, Y.: Potential of the Genetic Algorithm Neural Network in the Assessment of Gait Patterns in Ankle Arthrodesis. Annals of Biomedical Engineering 29, 83–91 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barton, J.G., Lees, A.: An application of neural networks for distinguishing gait patterns on the basis of hip-knee joint angle diagrams. Gait & Posture 5, 28–33 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kohle, M., Merkl, D.: Analyzing human gait patterns for malfunction detection. In: Proceedings of the 2000 ACM symposium on Applied computing, vol. 1 (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Begg, R.K., Palaniswami, M., Owen, B.: Support Vector Machines for Automated Gait Classification. IEEE Transactions On Biomedical Engineering 52(5) (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bertani, B., Cappello, A., Benedetti, M.G., Simoncini, L., Catani, F.: Flat foot functional evaluation using pattern recognition of ground reaction data. Clinical Biomechanics 14, 484–493 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lakany, H., Hayes, G.: An algorithm for recognizing walkers. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on AVBPA, pp. 112–118 (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    Tanawongsuwan, R., Bobick, A.: Gait Recognition from Time-Normalized Joint-Angle Trajectories in the Walking Plane. In: CVPR, vol. 02(2), p. 726 (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mao, J.: A case study on bagging, boosting and basic ensembles of neural networks for OCR. In: Proceeding of IJCNN 1998, vol. 3, pp. 1828–1833 (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim, J., Ahn, J., Cho, S.: Ensemble competitive learning neural networks with reduced input dimension. Int. J. Neural Syst., 133–142 (1995)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sharkey, A.J.C.: On combining artificial neural networks. Connection Science 8, 299–314 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sharkey, A.J.C.: Types of multinet system. In: Roli, F., Kittler, J. (eds.) MCS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2364, Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kittler, J., Hatef, M., Duin, R.P.W., Matas, J.: On Combining Classifiers. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 20(3) (1998)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Duda, R.O., Hart, P.E., Stork, D.G.: Pattern Classification, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York (2001)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nigar Sen Koktas
    • 1
  • Nese Yalabik
    • 2
  • Gunes Yavuzer
    • 3
  1. 1.Informatics InstituteMETUAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Computer Engineering DepartmentMETUAnkaraTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationAnkara University Medical SchoolAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations