4.6 Article

Centre of Pressure Estimation during Walking Using Only Inertial-Measurement Units and End-To-End Statistical Modelling

Journal

SENSORS
Volume 20, Issue 21, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s20216136

Keywords

gait analysis; inertial measurement unit; gait model; estimation of centre of pressure; artificial neural network; wearable sensors; balance; rehabilitation

Funding

  1. Slovenian Research Agency [P2-0228, J2-8172]
  2. European Community's H2020 Research and Innovation Programme [731931]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Estimation of the centre of pressure (COP) is an important part of the gait analysis, for example, when evaluating the functional capacity of individuals affected by motor impairment. Inertial measurement units (IMUs) and force sensors are commonly used to measure gait characteristic of healthy and impaired subjects. We present a methodology for estimating the COP solely from raw gyroscope, accelerometer, and magnetometer data from IMUs using statistical modelling. We demonstrate the viability of the method using an example of two models: a linear model and a non-linear Long-Short-Term Memory (LSTM) neural network model. Models were trained on the COP ground truth data measured using an instrumented treadmill and achieved the average intra-subject root mean square (RMS) error between estimated and ground truth COP of 12.3 mm and the average inter-subject RMS error of 23.7 mm which is comparable or better than similar studies so far. We show that the calibration procedure in the instrumented treadmill can be as short as a couple of minutes without the decrease in our model performance. We also show that the magnetic component of the recorded IMU signal, which is most sensitive to environmental changes, can be safely dropped without a significant decrease in model performance. Finally, we show that the number of IMUs can be reduced to five without deterioration in the model performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available