Effect of normalization and phase angle calculations on continuous relative phase

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

44 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to determine if phase plot normalization and phase angle definitions would have an affect on continuous relative phase calculations. A subject ran on a treadmill while sagittal plane kinematic data were collected with a high-speed (180Hz) camera. Segmental angular displacements and velocities were used to create phase plots, and examine the coordination between the leg and thigh. Continuous relative phase was calculated with a combination of two different amplitude normalization techniques, and two different phase angle definitions. Differences between the techniques were noted with a root mean square (RMS) calculation. RMS values indicated that there were differences in the configuration of the non-normalized and normalized continuous relative phase curves. Graphically and numerically, it was noted that normalization tended to modify the continuous relative phase curve configuration. Differences in continuous relative phase curves were due to a loss in the aspect ratio of the phase plot during normalization. Normalization tended to neglect the nonlinear forces acting on the system since it did not maintain the aspect ratio of the phase plot. Normalization is not necessary because the arc tangent function accounts for differences in amplitudes between the segments. RMS values indicated that there were profound differences in the continuous relative phase curve when the phase angle was normalized and a phase angle was calculated relative to the right horizontal axis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)369-374
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Biomechanics
Volume35
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 26 2002

Fingerprint

Thigh
Biomechanical Phenomena
Aspect ratio
Leg
Exercise equipment
High speed cameras
Kinematics

Keywords

  • Continuous relative phase
  • Coordination
  • Normalization
  • Phase angle

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Effect of normalization and phase angle calculations on continuous relative phase. / Kurz, Max J; Stergiou, Nicholas.

In: Journal of Biomechanics, Vol. 35, No. 3, 26.02.2002, p. 369-374.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{e74a3af266f34db2bf706534fba828ac,
title = "Effect of normalization and phase angle calculations on continuous relative phase",
abstract = "The purpose of this investigation was to determine if phase plot normalization and phase angle definitions would have an affect on continuous relative phase calculations. A subject ran on a treadmill while sagittal plane kinematic data were collected with a high-speed (180Hz) camera. Segmental angular displacements and velocities were used to create phase plots, and examine the coordination between the leg and thigh. Continuous relative phase was calculated with a combination of two different amplitude normalization techniques, and two different phase angle definitions. Differences between the techniques were noted with a root mean square (RMS) calculation. RMS values indicated that there were differences in the configuration of the non-normalized and normalized continuous relative phase curves. Graphically and numerically, it was noted that normalization tended to modify the continuous relative phase curve configuration. Differences in continuous relative phase curves were due to a loss in the aspect ratio of the phase plot during normalization. Normalization tended to neglect the nonlinear forces acting on the system since it did not maintain the aspect ratio of the phase plot. Normalization is not necessary because the arc tangent function accounts for differences in amplitudes between the segments. RMS values indicated that there were profound differences in the continuous relative phase curve when the phase angle was normalized and a phase angle was calculated relative to the right horizontal axis.",
keywords = "Continuous relative phase, Coordination, Normalization, Phase angle",
author = "Kurz, {Max J} and Nicholas Stergiou",
year = "2002",
month = "2",
day = "26",
doi = "10.1016/S0021-9290(01)00211-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "369--374",
journal = "Journal of Biomechanics",
issn = "0021-9290",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effect of normalization and phase angle calculations on continuous relative phase

AU - Kurz, Max J

AU - Stergiou, Nicholas

PY - 2002/2/26

Y1 - 2002/2/26

N2 - The purpose of this investigation was to determine if phase plot normalization and phase angle definitions would have an affect on continuous relative phase calculations. A subject ran on a treadmill while sagittal plane kinematic data were collected with a high-speed (180Hz) camera. Segmental angular displacements and velocities were used to create phase plots, and examine the coordination between the leg and thigh. Continuous relative phase was calculated with a combination of two different amplitude normalization techniques, and two different phase angle definitions. Differences between the techniques were noted with a root mean square (RMS) calculation. RMS values indicated that there were differences in the configuration of the non-normalized and normalized continuous relative phase curves. Graphically and numerically, it was noted that normalization tended to modify the continuous relative phase curve configuration. Differences in continuous relative phase curves were due to a loss in the aspect ratio of the phase plot during normalization. Normalization tended to neglect the nonlinear forces acting on the system since it did not maintain the aspect ratio of the phase plot. Normalization is not necessary because the arc tangent function accounts for differences in amplitudes between the segments. RMS values indicated that there were profound differences in the continuous relative phase curve when the phase angle was normalized and a phase angle was calculated relative to the right horizontal axis.

AB - The purpose of this investigation was to determine if phase plot normalization and phase angle definitions would have an affect on continuous relative phase calculations. A subject ran on a treadmill while sagittal plane kinematic data were collected with a high-speed (180Hz) camera. Segmental angular displacements and velocities were used to create phase plots, and examine the coordination between the leg and thigh. Continuous relative phase was calculated with a combination of two different amplitude normalization techniques, and two different phase angle definitions. Differences between the techniques were noted with a root mean square (RMS) calculation. RMS values indicated that there were differences in the configuration of the non-normalized and normalized continuous relative phase curves. Graphically and numerically, it was noted that normalization tended to modify the continuous relative phase curve configuration. Differences in continuous relative phase curves were due to a loss in the aspect ratio of the phase plot during normalization. Normalization tended to neglect the nonlinear forces acting on the system since it did not maintain the aspect ratio of the phase plot. Normalization is not necessary because the arc tangent function accounts for differences in amplitudes between the segments. RMS values indicated that there were profound differences in the continuous relative phase curve when the phase angle was normalized and a phase angle was calculated relative to the right horizontal axis.

KW - Continuous relative phase

KW - Coordination

KW - Normalization

KW - Phase angle

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0036169386&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0036169386&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0021-9290(01)00211-1

DO - 10.1016/S0021-9290(01)00211-1

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 369

EP - 374

JO - Journal of Biomechanics

JF - Journal of Biomechanics

SN - 0021-9290

IS - 3

ER -