↓ Skip to main content

Forearm Motion Recognition With Noncontact Capacitive Sensing

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurorobotics, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 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
Forearm Motion Recognition With Noncontact Capacitive Sensing
Published in
Frontiers in Neurorobotics, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnbot.2018.00047
Pubmed ID
Authors

Enhao Zheng, Jingeng Mai, Yuxiang Liu, Qining Wang

Abstract

This study presents a noncontact capacitive sensing method for forearm motion recognition. A method is proposed to record upper limb motion information from muscle contractions without contact with human skin, compensating for the limitations of existing sEMG-based methods. The sensing front-ends are designed based on human forearm shapes, and the forearm limb shape changes caused by muscle contractions will be represented by capacitance signals. After implementation of the capacitive sensing system, experiments on healthy subjects are conducted to evaluate the effectiveness. Nine motion patterns combined with 16 motion transitions are investigated on seven participants. We also designed an automatic data labeling method based on inertial signals from the measured hand, which greatly accelerated the training procedure. With the capacitive sensing system and the designed recognition algorithm, the method produced an average recognition of over 92%. Correct decisions could be made with approximately a 347-ms delay from the relaxed state to the time point of motion initiation. The confounding factors that affect the performances are also analyzed, including the sliding window length, the motion types and the external disturbances. We found the average accuracy increased to 98.7% when five motion patterns were recognized. The results of the study proved the feasibility and revealed the problems of the noncontact capacitive sensing approach on upper-limb motion sensing and recognition. Future efforts in this direction could be worthwhile for achieving more promising outcomes.

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 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 25%
Researcher 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Lecturer 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 13%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 1 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 7 44%
Computer Science 5 31%
Design 1 6%
Unknown 3 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 05 August 2018.
All research outputs
#15,014,589
of 23,098,660 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#404
of 887 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#198,656
of 330,334 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#16
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,098,660 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 887 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. 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 330,334 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.