↓ Skip to main content

Experimental Validation of Motor Primitive-Based Control for Leg Exoskeletons during Continuous Multi-Locomotion Tasks

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurorobotics, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
84 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
Experimental Validation of Motor Primitive-Based Control for Leg Exoskeletons during Continuous Multi-Locomotion Tasks
Published in
Frontiers in Neurorobotics, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnbot.2017.00015
Pubmed ID
Authors

Virginia Ruiz Garate, Andrea Parri, Tingfang Yan, Marko Munih, Raffaele Molino Lova, Nicola Vitiello, Renaud Ronsse

Abstract

An emerging approach to design locomotion assistive devices deals with reproducing desirable biological principles of human locomotion. In this paper, we present a bio-inspired controller for locomotion assistive devices based on the concept of motor primitives. The weighted combination of artificial primitives results in a set of virtual muscle stimulations. These stimulations then activate a virtual musculoskeletal model producing reference assistive torque profiles for different locomotion tasks (i.e., walking, ascending stairs, and descending stairs). The paper reports the validation of the controller through a set of experiments conducted with healthy participants. The proposed controller was tested for the first time with a unilateral leg exoskeleton assisting hip, knee, and ankle joints by delivering a fraction of the computed reference torques. Importantly, subjects performed a track involving ground-level walking, ascending stairs, and descending stairs and several transitions between these tasks. These experiments highlighted the capability of the controller to provide relevant assistive torques and to effectively handle transitions between the tasks. Subjects displayed a natural interaction with the device. Moreover, they significantly decreased the time needed to complete the track when the assistance was provided, as compared to wearing the device with no assistance.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 84 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 84 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 25%
Student > Master 11 13%
Researcher 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 24 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 33 39%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 5%
Computer Science 3 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 2%
Other 10 12%
Unknown 26 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 22 March 2017.
All research outputs
#15,450,375
of 22,959,818 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#459
of 872 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,310
of 333,978 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#17
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,959,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 872 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 333,978 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.