Towards personalized gait rehabilitation: How robustly can we identify personal gait signatures with machine learning?

Djordje Slijepcevic, Fabian Horst, Marvin Simak, Wolfgang Immanuel Schöllhorn, Matthias Zeppelzauer, Brian Horsak
{"title":"Towards personalized gait rehabilitation: How robustly can we identify personal gait signatures with machine learning?","authors":"Djordje Slijepcevic, Fabian Horst, Marvin Simak, Wolfgang Immanuel Schöllhorn, Matthias Zeppelzauer, Brian Horsak","doi":"10.1016/j.gaitpost.2023.07.232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Personalizing gait rehabilitation requires a comprehensive understanding of the unique gait characteristics of an individual patient, i.e., personal gait signature. Utilizing machine learning to classify individuals based on their gait can help to identify gait signatures [1]. This work exemplifies how an explainable artificial intelligence method can identify the most important input features that characterize the personal gait signature. How robust can gait signatures be identified with machine learning and how sensitive are these signatures with respect to the amount of training data per person? We utilized subsets of the AIST Gait Database 2019 [2], the GaitRec dataset [3], and the Gutenberg Gait Database [4] containing bilateral ground reaction forces (GRFs) during level walking at a self-selected speed. Eight GRF samples from each of 2,092 individuals (1,410/680 male/female, 809/1,283 health control/gait disorder, 1,355/737 shod/barefoot) were used for a gait-based person classification with a (linear) support vector machine (SVM). Two randomly selected samples from each individual served as test data. Gait signatures were identified using relevance scores obtained with layer-wise relevance propagation [5]. To assess the robustness of the identified gait signatures, we compared the relevance scores using Pearson’s correlation coefficient between step-wise reduced training data, from k=6 to k=1 training samples per individual. For the baseline setup (k=6), the SVM achieved a test classification accuracy of 99.1% with 36 out of 4184 test samples being misclassified. The results for the setups with reduced training samples are visualized in Fig. 1. Fig. 1: Overview of the experimental results.Download : Download high-res image (210KB)Download : Download full-size image A reduction of training samples per individual causes a decrease in classification accuracy (e.g., by 17.7% in the case of one training sample per individual). The results show that at least five training samples per individual are necessary to achieve a classification accuracy of approximately 99% for over 2,000 individuals. A similar effect is observed for gait signatures, which also show a slight degradation in robustness as the number of training samples decreases. In some cases, a model trained with less data per individual learns a different gait signature than a model trained with more data. In the test sample with the lowest correlation (see Fig. 1E), we observe a significant deviation in relevance for some input features. However, only 114 test samples (2.7%) are below a moderate correlation of r=0.4 [6], indicating that gait signatures are quite robust, even when using one training sample per individual. This is supported by a strong median correlation of r=0.71 [6] (and the highest correlation of r=0.96) between the gait signatures. As automatically identified gait signatures seem to be robust, this approach has the potential to serve as a basis for tailoring interventions to each patient’s specific needs.","PeriodicalId":94018,"journal":{"name":"Gait & posture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gait & posture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2023.07.232","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Personalizing gait rehabilitation requires a comprehensive understanding of the unique gait characteristics of an individual patient, i.e., personal gait signature. Utilizing machine learning to classify individuals based on their gait can help to identify gait signatures [1]. This work exemplifies how an explainable artificial intelligence method can identify the most important input features that characterize the personal gait signature. How robust can gait signatures be identified with machine learning and how sensitive are these signatures with respect to the amount of training data per person? We utilized subsets of the AIST Gait Database 2019 [2], the GaitRec dataset [3], and the Gutenberg Gait Database [4] containing bilateral ground reaction forces (GRFs) during level walking at a self-selected speed. Eight GRF samples from each of 2,092 individuals (1,410/680 male/female, 809/1,283 health control/gait disorder, 1,355/737 shod/barefoot) were used for a gait-based person classification with a (linear) support vector machine (SVM). Two randomly selected samples from each individual served as test data. Gait signatures were identified using relevance scores obtained with layer-wise relevance propagation [5]. To assess the robustness of the identified gait signatures, we compared the relevance scores using Pearson’s correlation coefficient between step-wise reduced training data, from k=6 to k=1 training samples per individual. For the baseline setup (k=6), the SVM achieved a test classification accuracy of 99.1% with 36 out of 4184 test samples being misclassified. The results for the setups with reduced training samples are visualized in Fig. 1. Fig. 1: Overview of the experimental results.Download : Download high-res image (210KB)Download : Download full-size image A reduction of training samples per individual causes a decrease in classification accuracy (e.g., by 17.7% in the case of one training sample per individual). The results show that at least five training samples per individual are necessary to achieve a classification accuracy of approximately 99% for over 2,000 individuals. A similar effect is observed for gait signatures, which also show a slight degradation in robustness as the number of training samples decreases. In some cases, a model trained with less data per individual learns a different gait signature than a model trained with more data. In the test sample with the lowest correlation (see Fig. 1E), we observe a significant deviation in relevance for some input features. However, only 114 test samples (2.7%) are below a moderate correlation of r=0.4 [6], indicating that gait signatures are quite robust, even when using one training sample per individual. This is supported by a strong median correlation of r=0.71 [6] (and the highest correlation of r=0.96) between the gait signatures. As automatically identified gait signatures seem to be robust, this approach has the potential to serve as a basis for tailoring interventions to each patient’s specific needs.
迈向个性化步态康复:我们如何用机器学习识别个人步态特征?
个性化的步态康复需要全面了解单个患者独特的步态特征,即个人步态特征。利用机器学习根据步态对个体进行分类可以帮助识别步态特征[1]。这项工作举例说明了一种可解释的人工智能方法如何识别表征个人步态特征的最重要的输入特征。机器学习识别步态特征的鲁棒性有多强?这些特征相对于每个人的训练数据量有多敏感?我们使用了AIST步态数据库2019[2]、GaitRec数据集[3]和Gutenberg步态数据库[4]的子集,其中包含以自选速度水平行走时的双边地面反作用力(GRFs)。使用(线性)支持向量机(SVM)对2,092名个体(1,410/680名男性/女性,809/1,283名健康控制/步态障碍,1,355/737名穿鞋/赤脚)的8个GRF样本进行步态分类。从每个个体中随机抽取两个样本作为测试数据。使用分层相关传播[5]获得的相关分数来识别步态特征。为了评估识别步态特征的稳健性,我们使用皮尔逊相关系数来比较逐步减少的训练数据之间的相关性得分,从每个个体的k=6到k=1训练样本。对于基线设置(k=6),支持向量机实现了99.1%的测试分类准确率,4184个测试样本中有36个被错误分类。减少训练样本的设置结果如图1所示。图1:实验结果概述。下载:下载高分辨率图像(210KB)下载:下载全尺寸图像每个个体训练样本的减少会导致分类准确率的下降(例如,在每个个体一个训练样本的情况下下降17.7%)。结果表明,对于超过2000个个体,每个个体至少需要5个训练样本才能达到约99%的分类准确率。在步态特征中也观察到类似的效果,随着训练样本数量的减少,鲁棒性也略有下降。在某些情况下,每个个体训练的数据较少的模型学习到的步态特征与使用更多数据训练的模型不同。在相关性最低的测试样本中(见图1E),我们观察到一些输入特征的相关性存在显著偏差。然而,只有114个测试样本(2.7%)低于r=0.4[6]的中度相关性,这表明步态特征是相当稳健的,即使每个个体使用一个训练样本。步态特征之间的强中值相关性r=0.71[6](最高相关性r=0.96)支持了这一点。由于自动识别的步态特征似乎是稳健的,这种方法有可能作为根据每个病人的具体需求定制干预措施的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信