↓ Skip to main content

A musculoskeletal model of human locomotion driven by a low dimensional set of impulsive excitation primitives

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
111 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
264 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
A musculoskeletal model of human locomotion driven by a low dimensional set of impulsive excitation primitives
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2013.00079
Pubmed ID
Authors

Massimo Sartori, Leonardo Gizzi, David G. Lloyd, Dario Farina

Abstract

Human locomotion has been described as being generated by an impulsive (burst-like) excitation of groups of musculotendon units, with timing dependent on the biomechanical goal of the task. Despite this view being supported by many experimental observations on specific locomotion tasks, it is still unknown if the same impulsive controller (i.e., a low-dimensional set of time-delayed excitastion primitives) can be used as input drive for large musculoskeletal models across different human locomotion tasks. For this purpose, we extracted, with non-negative matrix factorization, five non-negative factors from a large sample of muscle electromyograms in two healthy subjects during four motor tasks. These included walking, running, sidestepping, and crossover cutting maneuvers. The extracted non-negative factors were then averaged and parameterized to obtain task-generic Gaussian-shaped impulsive excitation curves or primitives. These were used to drive a subject-specific musculoskeletal model of the human lower extremity. Results showed that the same set of five impulsive excitation primitives could be used to predict the dynamics of 34 musculotendon units and the resulting hip, knee and ankle joint moments (i.e., NRMSE = 0.18 ± 0.08, and R (2) = 0.73 ± 0.22 across all tasks and subjects) without substantial loss of accuracy with respect to using experimental electromyograms (i.e., NRMSE = 0.16 ± 0.07, and R (2) = 0.78 ± 0.18 across all tasks and subjects). Results support the hypothesis that biomechanically different motor tasks might share similar neuromuscular control strategies. This might have implications in neurorehabilitation technologies such as human-machine interfaces for the torque-driven, proportional control of powered prostheses and orthoses. In this, device control commands (i.e., predicted joint torque) could be derived without direct experimental data but relying on simple parameterized Gaussian-shaped curves, thus decreasing the input drive complexity and the number of needed sensors.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 2%
Germany 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 250 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 79 30%
Researcher 40 15%
Student > Master 38 14%
Student > Bachelor 20 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 6%
Other 38 14%
Unknown 32 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 130 49%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 16 6%
Neuroscience 14 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 5%
Sports and Recreations 12 5%
Other 26 10%
Unknown 52 20%
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 26 June 2013.
All research outputs
#17,690,153
of 22,712,476 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#957
of 1,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,183
of 280,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#82
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,712,476 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 280,743 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.