Hello!
What are the main differences between Static Optimization and CMC? In what scenarios would using one be better than the other?
In which tool can we import EMG?
For example, the project I am working on is using OpenSim to find the knee joint contact loads during ergometer rowing, using EMG data.
Thanks in advance,
Kathleen Balfour
Differences between Static Optimization and CMC?
- KATHLEEN BALFOUR
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 7:19 pm
- Dimitar Stanev
- Posts: 1096
- Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 5:14 am
Re: Differences between Static Optimization and CMC?
Hi,
See (Anderson, F. C., Pandy, M. G., "Static and dynamic optimization solutions for gait are practically equivalent", Journal of Biomechanics, 2001)
http://simtk-confluence.stanford.edu:80 ... d+with+CMC
http://simtk-confluence.stanford.edu:80 ... d+with+CMC
Best
Static optimization (SO) is faster. SO partitions the simulation time at some intervals and evaluates the optimization criterion without considering what is happening before or after (each time step the computations are independent). On the other hand CMC is a dynamic optimization, meaning it takes into account the evolution of the system. CMC solves the problem as follows: 1) produce a set of muscle inputs, 2) integrate and produce trajectory, 3) compare the trajectory with the desired one and 4) adjust the muscle inputs based on the tracking controller.What are the main differences between Static Optimization and CMC?
You should consider simulation time. CMC can be more accurate, in sense that it can better reproduce the activation patterns. During SO you can choose if you want to approximate the muscle behavior (fast target) or use a better approximation. Also SO, does not consider activation dynamics (delay), because it solves the problem independently (no memory). There is not answer to your question it depends on your problem, but I would go first with SO.In what scenarios would using one be better than the other?
See (Anderson, F. C., Pandy, M. G., "Static and dynamic optimization solutions for gait are practically equivalent", Journal of Biomechanics, 2001)
What you can do if you have your EMG data is to further constraint the muscle activations that are computed by the optimization, because either way you need to solve a redundant problem. I think that you can't constraint SO, but you can apply activation constraints during CMC. So in your case, you probably need to use CMC.In which tool can we import EMG?
http://simtk-confluence.stanford.edu:80 ... d+with+CMC
http://simtk-confluence.stanford.edu:80 ... d+with+CMC
Best
- KATHLEEN BALFOUR
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 7:19 pm
- Charles Khazoom
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2018 2:07 pm
Re: Differences between Static Optimization and CMC?
Hi,
I have also been wondering the difference between SO and CMC, as the faster SO seems to yield similar results to CMC in many cases even if it is neglecting muscle activation dynamics. Why would someone want to consider muscle activation dynamics (thus use CMC) for walking, where the activation dynamics is probably so much faster than the slower, more impotant rigid-body dynamics. In particular, why was CMC prefered to SO in this paper :
Dembia CL, Silder A, Uchida TK, Hicks JL, Delp SL (2017) Simulating ideal assistive devices to reduce the metabolic cost of walking with heavy loads. PLoS ONE 12(7): e0180320. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180320
Thank you for your help !
I have also been wondering the difference between SO and CMC, as the faster SO seems to yield similar results to CMC in many cases even if it is neglecting muscle activation dynamics. Why would someone want to consider muscle activation dynamics (thus use CMC) for walking, where the activation dynamics is probably so much faster than the slower, more impotant rigid-body dynamics. In particular, why was CMC prefered to SO in this paper :
Dembia CL, Silder A, Uchida TK, Hicks JL, Delp SL (2017) Simulating ideal assistive devices to reduce the metabolic cost of walking with heavy loads. PLoS ONE 12(7): e0180320. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180320
Thank you for your help !