Intent Recognition in a Powered Lower Limb Prosthesis Using Time History Information

New computerized and powered lower limb prostheses are being developed that enable amputees to perform multiple locomotion modes. However, current lower limb prosthesis controllers are not capable of transitioning these devices automatically and seamlessly between locomotion modes such as level-ground walking, stairs and slopes. The focus of this study was to evaluate different intent recognition interfaces, which if configured properly, may be capable of providing more natural transitions between locomotion modes. Intent recognition can be accomplished using a multitude of different signals from mechanical sensors on the prosthesis. Since these signals are non-stationary over any given stride, and gait is cyclical, time history information may improve locomotion mode recognition. The authors propose a dynamic Bayesian network classification strategy to incorporate prior sensor information over the gait cycle with current sensor information. Six transfemoral amputees performed locomotion circuits comprising level-ground walking and ascending/descending stairs and ramps using a powered knee and ankle prosthesis. Using time history reduced steady-state misclassifications by over half (p < 0.01), when compared to strategies that did not use time history, without reducing intent recognition performance during transitions. These results suggest that including time history information across the gait cycle can enhance locomotion mode intent recognition performance.

[1]  H.A. Varol,et al.  Design and control of an active electrical knee and ankle prosthesis , 2008, 2008 2nd IEEE RAS & EMBS International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics.

[2]  H.A. Varol,et al.  Preliminary Evaluations of a Self-Contained Anthropomorphic Transfemoral Prosthesis , 2009, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[3]  Kevin P. Murphy,et al.  Dynamic Bayesian Networks for Audio-Visual Speech Recognition , 2002, EURASIP J. Adv. Signal Process..

[4]  D. Datta,et al.  Mobility outcome following unilateral lower limb amputation , 2003, Prosthetics and orthotics international.

[5]  Massimo Sartori,et al.  SVM classification of locomotion modes using surface electromyography for applications in rehabilitation robotics , 2010, 19th International Symposium in Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[6]  Michael Goldfarb,et al.  Design and Control of a Powered Transfemoral Prosthesis , 2008, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[7]  Robert D. Lipschutz,et al.  Targeted muscle reinnervation for real-time myoelectric control of multifunction artificial arms. , 2009, JAMA.

[8]  Mark J. F. Gales,et al.  The Application of Hidden Markov Models in Speech Recognition , 2007, Found. Trends Signal Process..

[9]  Michael Goldfarb,et al.  Upslope Walking With a Powered Knee and Ankle Prosthesis: Initial Results With an Amputee Subject , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[10]  D. Winter Biomechanical motor patterns in normal walking. , 1983, Journal of motor behavior.

[11]  Fan Zhang,et al.  Continuous Locomotion-Mode Identification for Prosthetic Legs Based on Neuromuscular–Mechanical Fusion , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[12]  He Huang,et al.  A Strategy for Identifying Locomotion Modes Using Surface Electromyography , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[13]  Michael Goldfarb,et al.  Design and Control of a Powered Knee and Ankle Prosthesis , 2007, Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[14]  Ari Wilkenfeld,et al.  Biologically inspired autoadaptive control of a knee prosthesis , 2000 .

[15]  Michael Goldfarb,et al.  Multiclass Real-Time Intent Recognition of a Powered Lower Limb Prosthesis , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[16]  R W Mann,et al.  An electrohydraulic knee-torque controller for a prosthesis simulator. , 1977, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[17]  M. Goldfarb,et al.  Control of Stair Ascent and Descent With a Powered Transfemoral Prosthesis , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering.

[18]  F. Sup,et al.  Design and Control of an Electrically Powered Knee Prosthesis , 2007, 2007 IEEE 10th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics.

[19]  Thomas G. Sugar,et al.  An Active Foot-Ankle Prosthesis With Biomechanical Energy Regeneration , 2010 .

[20]  Hugh M. Herr,et al.  A method to determine the optimal features for control of a powered lower-limb prostheses , 2011, 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[21]  Levi J. Hargrove,et al.  A Comparison of Surface and Intramuscular Myoelectric Signal Classification , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[22]  J. Czerniecki,et al.  Kinematic and kinetic comparisons of transfemoral amputee gait using C-Leg and Mauch SNS prosthetic knees. , 2006, Journal of rehabilitation research and development.

[23]  Richard A. Brand,et al.  The biomechanics and motor control of human gait: Normal, elderly, and pathological , 1992 .

[24]  S.K. Au,et al.  Biomechanical Design of a Powered Ankle-Foot Prosthesis , 2007, 2007 IEEE 10th International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics.

[25]  Lawrence R. Rabiner,et al.  A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition , 1989, Proc. IEEE.

[26]  Hugh M. Herr,et al.  Powered Ankle--Foot Prosthesis Improves Walking Metabolic Economy , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.