Evaluation of the Leap Motion Controller during the performance of visually-guided upper limb movements.
Evaluation of the Leap Motion Controller during the performance of visually-guided upper limb movements.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0193639
复制
发表时间：
2018
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Tung J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Niechwiej-Szwedo E;Gonzalez D;Nouredanesh M;Tung J
上肢伸展的运动学分析提供了对运动的中枢神经系统控制的深入了解。直到最近，运动学检查的电机控制一直局限于在传统的研究实验室进行的研究，因为用于数据收集的运动捕捉设备是不容易携带和昂贵的。最近开发的无标记系统Leap Motion Controller（LMC）是一种便携且廉价的跟踪设备，可以记录3D手部和手指位置。本研究的主要目标是评估并行的可靠性和有效性的LMC相比，Optotrak，一个标准的运动捕捉系统，时间的准确性和峰值速度的措施，在上肢的性能，视觉引导运动。在实验1中，14名参与者执行瞄准运动，以视觉目标在计算机显示器上。进行Bland-Altman分析，以评估时间准确度（运动时间、减速间期持续时间）、峰值速度和空间准确度（终点准确度）指标的有效性和一致性限度。此外，使用单样本t检验来检验从Optotrak和LMC获得的测量值之间的误差差为零的假设。在实验2中，15名参与者进行了Fitts类型的瞄准任务，以评估LMC是否能够评估一个众所周知的速度-准确性权衡关系。实验3评估了15名参与者在执行一个由到达，抓握和放置任务组成的序列期间的时间协调模式。t检验的结果表明，时间测量的误差差异与零有显著差异。根据3次实验的结果，运动时间的平均时间误差为40±44 ms，峰值速度的误差为0.024±0.103 m/s。LMC和Optotrak之间空间精度测量的一致性限度在2-5 cm之间。虽然LMC系统是一种低成本、高度便携的系统，可以方便在传统实验室环境之外收集运动学数据，但时间和空间误差可能会限制该设备在某些环境中的使用。
Kinematic analysis of upper limb reaching provides insight into the central nervous system control of movements. Until recently, kinematic examination of motor control has been limited to studies conducted in traditional research laboratories because motion capture equipment used for data collection is not easily portable and expensive. A recently developed markerless system, the Leap Motion Controller (LMC), is a portable and inexpensive tracking device that allows recording of 3D hand and finger position. The main goal of this study was to assess the concurrent reliability and validity of the LMC as compared to the Optotrak, a criterion-standard motion capture system, for measures of temporal accuracy and peak velocity during the performance of upper limb, visually-guided movements. In experiment 1, 14 participants executed aiming movements to visual targets presented on a computer monitor. Bland-Altman analysis was conducted to assess the validity and limits of agreement for measures of temporal accuracy (movement time, duration of deceleration interval), peak velocity, and spatial accuracy (endpoint accuracy). In addition, a one-sample t-test was used to test the hypothesis that the error difference between measures obtained from Optotrak and LMC is zero. In experiment 2, 15 participants performed a Fitts’ type aiming task in order to assess whether the LMC is capable of assessing a well-known speed-accuracy trade-off relationship. Experiment 3 assessed the temporal coordination pattern during the performance of a sequence consisting of a reaching, grasping, and placement task in 15 participants. Results from the t-test showed that the error difference in temporal measures was significantly different from zero. Based on the results from the 3 experiments, the average temporal error in movement time was 40±44 ms, and the error in peak velocity was 0.024±0.103 m/s. The limits of agreement between the LMC and Optotrak for spatial accuracy measures ranged between 2–5 cm. Although the LMC system is a low-cost, highly portable system, which could facilitate collection of kinematic data outside of the traditional laboratory settings, the temporal and spatial errors may limit the use of the device in some settings.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1080/14640748708401806
发表时间：
1987-11-01
期刊：
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY SECTION A-HUMAN EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY
影响因子：
--
作者：
MACKENZIE, CL;MARTENIUK, RG;EICKMEIER, B
通讯作者：
EICKMEIER, B
影响因子：
1.8
作者：
HAY, L;BARD, C;TEASDALE, N
通讯作者：
TEASDALE, N
影响因子：
1.1
作者：
Grierson, Lawrence E. M.;Gonzalez, Claudia;Elliott, Digby
通讯作者：
Elliott, Digby
影响因子：
1.4
作者：
HAY, L
通讯作者：
HAY, L
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Hansen, Steve;Elliott, Digby;Tremblay, Luc
通讯作者：
Tremblay, Luc