↓ Skip to main content

Dynamic Reweighting of Three Modalities for Sensor Fusion

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
83 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
207 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Dynamic Reweighting of Three Modalities for Sensor Fusion
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0088132
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sungjae Hwang, Peter Agada, Tim Kiemel, John J. Jeka

Abstract

We simultaneously perturbed visual, vestibular and proprioceptive modalities to understand how sensory feedback is re-weighted so that overall feedback remains suited to stabilizing upright stance. Ten healthy young subjects received an 80 Hz vibratory stimulus to their bilateral Achilles tendons (stimulus turns on-off at 0.28 Hz), a ± 1 mA binaural monopolar galvanic vestibular stimulus at 0.36 Hz, and a visual stimulus at 0.2 Hz during standing. The visual stimulus was presented at different amplitudes (0.2, 0.8 deg rotation about ankle axis) to measure: the change in gain (weighting) to vision, an intramodal effect; and a change in gain to vibration and galvanic vestibular stimulation, both intermodal effects. The results showed a clear intramodal visual effect, indicating a de-emphasis on vision when the amplitude of visual stimulus increased. At the same time, an intermodal visual-proprioceptive reweighting effect was observed with the addition of vibration, which is thought to change proprioceptive inputs at the ankles, forcing the nervous system to rely more on vision and vestibular modalities. Similar intermodal effects for visual-vestibular reweighting were observed, suggesting that vestibular information is not a "fixed" reference, but is dynamically adjusted in the sensor fusion process. This is the first time, to our knowledge, that the interplay between the three primary modalities for postural control has been clearly delineated, illustrating a central process that fuses these modalities for accurate estimates of self-motion.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 207 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 203 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 39 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 14%
Researcher 28 14%
Student > Bachelor 23 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 5%
Other 40 19%
Unknown 37 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 35 17%
Neuroscience 31 15%
Engineering 23 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 19 9%
Sports and Recreations 19 9%
Other 26 13%
Unknown 54 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2021.
All research outputs
#7,439,080
of 22,741,406 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#88,444
of 194,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,479
of 306,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,329
of 5,625 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,741,406 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,090 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 306,968 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,625 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.