{"title":"Selection of insole pressure sensors for ground reaction force estimation through studying principal component analysis","authors":"Amal Kammoun , Philippe Ravier , Olivier Buttelli","doi":"10.1016/j.bspc.2025.107848","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In the context of low-cost and portable device for measuring pressure using insole system, selection of the relevant sensors is addressed. In a preliminary step, we compared the accuracy of Ground Reaction Force (GRF) components estimation between two pressure insoles: Fscan and Moticon. This estimation was done using Artificial Neural Network combined with Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Secondly, the focus of this study was to identify the optimal numbers and locations of the pressure sensors by a sensor ranking procedure for both insoles using PCA and three selection strategies. The ranking is determined by analyzing the loss value obtained through PCA for each pressure sensor with three selection strategies. Using data from gold standard force plates, we assessed GRF components estimation accuracies and sensor locations for both insoles during walking activities. As a first result, in our context, Moticon insole yielded superior performance for estimating GRF components compared to Fscan. Secondly, the selection procedure allowed deleting 3 among 16 sensors for Moticon (both feet) and 33/30 (left foot/right foot) among 64 sensors for Fscan. Finally, we have validated these optimal numbers by showing that the quality of GRF components estimation was minimally impacted. Remarkably, both insoles with fewer sensors led to better vertical component estimations. These results should be considered in the context of this study, which does not claim to be generalizable. As these results do not reflect a wide range of activities and subject profiles, it is therefore necessary to re-evaluate these selections with other activity conditions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55362,"journal":{"name":"Biomedical Signal Processing and Control","volume":"107 ","pages":"Article 107848"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biomedical Signal Processing and Control","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1746809425003593","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In the context of low-cost and portable device for measuring pressure using insole system, selection of the relevant sensors is addressed. In a preliminary step, we compared the accuracy of Ground Reaction Force (GRF) components estimation between two pressure insoles: Fscan and Moticon. This estimation was done using Artificial Neural Network combined with Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Secondly, the focus of this study was to identify the optimal numbers and locations of the pressure sensors by a sensor ranking procedure for both insoles using PCA and three selection strategies. The ranking is determined by analyzing the loss value obtained through PCA for each pressure sensor with three selection strategies. Using data from gold standard force plates, we assessed GRF components estimation accuracies and sensor locations for both insoles during walking activities. As a first result, in our context, Moticon insole yielded superior performance for estimating GRF components compared to Fscan. Secondly, the selection procedure allowed deleting 3 among 16 sensors for Moticon (both feet) and 33/30 (left foot/right foot) among 64 sensors for Fscan. Finally, we have validated these optimal numbers by showing that the quality of GRF components estimation was minimally impacted. Remarkably, both insoles with fewer sensors led to better vertical component estimations. These results should be considered in the context of this study, which does not claim to be generalizable. As these results do not reflect a wide range of activities and subject profiles, it is therefore necessary to re-evaluate these selections with other activity conditions.
期刊介绍:
Biomedical Signal Processing and Control aims to provide a cross-disciplinary international forum for the interchange of information on research in the measurement and analysis of signals and images in clinical medicine and the biological sciences. Emphasis is placed on contributions dealing with the practical, applications-led research on the use of methods and devices in clinical diagnosis, patient monitoring and management.
Biomedical Signal Processing and Control reflects the main areas in which these methods are being used and developed at the interface of both engineering and clinical science. The scope of the journal is defined to include relevant review papers, technical notes, short communications and letters. Tutorial papers and special issues will also be published.