2016 session 10b - university of...

Musculoskeletal Biomechanics BIOEN 520 | ME 527

Mini-‐Lab 4 Mee>ng

Presenta>ons

Laboratory 4 Overview... •  Tradi>onally, two types of presenta>ons: •  Posters and podiums •  Thema>c posters •  Poster >ps •  Podium >ps

Poster vs. podium •  Podium is more pres>gious, usually beLer scoring abstracts •  Podiums definitely more stressful •  Similar amounts of work •  Posters afford more 1-‐on-‐1 discussions

Thema>c posters •  best of both worlds poster in room 1 or 2 or 3 slides open forum discussion really depends on having a good moderator

Posters •  follow instruc>ons!

§  especially on the dimensions •  use university colors •  add university / ins>tu>on logos •  follow abstract format

§  intro, methods, results, discussion •  acknowledge your funding sources •  prepare a 1-‐minute elevator talk, as well as a 5-‐minute overview •  think of poten>al ques>ons

Posters •  format well – make sure things are symetric, tabs line up, etc. •  bring printed copies of posters to hand out

Poster Tips •  light (+) vs. dark (-‐) backgrounds

Posters

Poster Tips •  light (+) vs. dark (-‐) backgrounds vs. ugly backgrounds (-‐-‐-‐-‐)

Posters

Poster Tips •  light (+) vs. dark (-‐) backgrounds •  bullets (+) vs. paragraphs (-‐)

Posters

Poster Tips •  light (+) vs. dark (-‐) backgrounds •  bullets (+) vs. paragraphs (-‐) •  large (+) vs. small (-‐) text

§  100% size, read 4 feet away

Posters

Podium presenta>ons •  follow instruc>ons!

§  especially on the >ming •  use university colors •  add university / ins>tu>on logos •  follow abstract format

§  intro, methods, results, discussion •  acknowledge your funding sources •  prac>ce, prac>ce, prac>ce – get >ming down •  do not read from hand held notes!

Podium presenta>ons •  laser pointer •  number of slides – 1 to 3 per minute

§  how fast do you want to talk? •  think of poten>al ques>ons •  format well – make sure things are symetric, tabs line up, etc. •  Ums, ahs, etc. •  Jokes? Baby pictures? Nature pictures?

Podium Tips •  dark (+) vs. light (-‐) backgrounds

Podium

Podium Tips •  dark (+) vs. light (-‐) backgrounds vs. ugly backgrounds (-‐-‐-‐)

Podium

Podium Tips •  dark (+) vs. light (-‐) backgrounds •  bullets (+) vs. text (-‐)

Podium

Podium Tips •  dark (+) vs. light (-‐) backgrounds •  bullets (+) vs. text (-‐) •  proper (+) vs. improper (-‐) text to image ra>o

Podium

Podium Tips •  dark (+) vs. light (-‐) backgrounds •  bullets (+) vs. text (-‐) •  proper (+) vs. improper (-‐) text to image ra>o •  choose colors wisely (+) vs. unwisely (-‐)

Podium

Podium Tips •  dark (+) vs. light (-‐) backgrounds •  bullets (+) vs. text (-‐) •  proper (+) vs. improper (-‐) text to image ra>o •  choose colors wisely (+) vs. unwisely (-‐) •  small (+) vs. big (-‐) tables

Podium

Poster and Podium Presenta>ons •  No silly fonts!!!! •  No silly fonts!!!! • No silly fonts!!!! •  And never,

•  never, •  never, use…!•  Comic sans!!!!!!

Student selected presenta>ons •  good and bad ones •  why…

Student selected presenta>ons •  Prof. Sam Burden's (UW EE) presenta>on for the UW Robo>cs Colloquium 2015

Predictable behavior from internal models

forward model inverse model

– theoretical and empirical evidence for pairing of forward + inverse models Bhushan, Shadmehr Bio. Cybern. 1999; Sanner, Kosha Bio. Cybern. 1999

+

– parallels in control theory, robotics, artificial intelligence: adaptive control, internal model principle, learning Francis, Wonham Automatica 1976; Sastry, Bodson Prentice Hall 1989

Sutton, Barto, Williams IEEE CSM 1992; Atkeson, Schaal ICML 1997

Papavassiliou, Russell IJCAI 1999

Student selected presenta>ons •  18th European Congress of Physical & Rehabilita>on Medicine in 2012

Student selected presenta>ons •  Arizona Physiological Society Annual Mee>ng (2014)

Student selected presenta>ons •  TED talk

Student selected presenta>ons •  University of Minnesota Design of Medical Devices Compe>>on

Student selected presenta>ons •  ORS 2015

• Cross sectional area smallest 45-55% of the insertion-insertion distance• ATT loading caused thinner/wider ACL (p=0.01)• Aspect ratio ranged between: 1.4-2.8; highest near femur• Aspect ratio increased 0.31 with ATT load (p=0.04)

Specimen group• 9 fresh-frozen human knees• All male, mean age: 57 yrs (range: 47-68)• No signs of previous injury or degeneration• Bone shafts embedded in epoxy resin• Carefully dissected by surgeon using loupes

Robotic positioning system• CASPAR Staubli RX90 (Ortho MAQUET, Germany)

• 6 degrees of freedom manipulation• Repeatability: 0.02mm

• Model 4015 Universal force sensor (JR3, USA)• Accuracy ± 0.2 N, ± 0.1 Nm

Statistical analysis• All data normalized as 0-100% of the femoral-tibial

insertion site distance• Morphology as a function of flexion/anterior load

assessed using repeated-measures ANOVA (knee position * cross-sectional slice location)

In situ analysis of anterior cruciate ligament shape and morphologyEric Thorhauer1, Yoshimasa Fujimaki2, Ruben O’Hara-Plotnik1, Scott Tashman1, Freddie Fu1

1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA2 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Showa University, Tokyo, Japan

Benedum Engineering Laboratory, University of Pittsburgh

The shape of the ACL has been highly contested: described as a series of bundles, a band, or a ribbon1,2,3. Understanding the true nature of the ligament is key to the design and selection of grafts that adequately restore the anatomy. Previous assessments of ACL shape and morphology have been conducted in a destructive manner using non-physiological anatomical positions. Purpose: 1.) Develop a method for accurately and objectively classifying ligament shape and morphology. 2.) Explore ACL morphology as a function of applied load and flexion angle

IntroductionACL in situ shape and morphology were quantified using objective, non-contacting measures in multiple loading/flexion positions.

• ACL shape is load/flexion angle dependent • All aspect ratios were smaller than 3: the ACL is not a “ribbon”• Cross-sectional shapes were mostly elliptical• Native ACL shape varies along the ligament axis unlike standard grafts

These results may aid surgeons in graft design and placement decisions.

Summary

Acknowledgements Corresponding AuthorEric Thorhauer, [email protected] of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Pittsburgh

Methods

Results

Shape varied along the ACL axis and with different knee positions/loading

• Elliptical shapes detected in 48% of unloaded ACL cross sections, 67% loaded• Bean/C-shapes were more common near the femoral insertion (34% of all unloaded and

26% of all loaded cross sections)• Triangle shapes were least common (18% unloaded, 7% loaded)

References 1. Siebold, KSSTA, 20142. Triantafyllidi, J. Arth. Rel. Surg., 20133. Smigielski, KSSTA, 2014

Student selected presenta>ons •  International summer program from

Nagoya University

Student selected presenta>ons •  hLp://www.k2.t.u-‐tokyo.ac.jp/percep>on/SmartLaserTracking/index-‐e.html

New Section 1 Page 1

2016 session 10b - university of...

Documents