Multi-layer Perceptron Neural Network (MLPNN) for
Effective Normal Gait Parameters Estimation
Trieu Phat Luu, H.B. Lim, Xingda Qu, and K.H. Low
Abstract—Progression action by the body and the time
taken to complete a walking cycle are the most basic
descriptions of walking. In human walking, these
parameters are defined as stride length and cadence,
respectively. They are the fundamental gait parameters
that determine the pattern of motion of a particular gait.
There are strong relationships between human anatomy
features and their gait parameters. However, these
relationships are vaguely understood. In this paper, we
propose a method using multilayer perceptron neuron
network (MLPNN) to obtain the value of gait
parameters for natural walking using human anatomy
features as input. These gait parameters will supplement
the objective gait planning for rehabilitation purpose.
GAITRite is used to collect data from 30 healthy
subjects. MLPNN is designed and trained. Learning
algorithm of the MLPNN to process experiment data is
also discussed in this paper. Walking index and a range
of suggested walking speed are the two outputs of
MLPNN. With these outputs, stride length and cadence
are computed. The result section of this paper shows two
main advantages of using MLPNN compared to existing
method. Firstly, normal walking velocity is suggested for
the patient. This is the first step in the rehabilitation
training process. Secondly, stride length and cadence
computed from index given by MLPNN is more accurate
than using constant value of index. The paper ends with
a summary of result and future work.
I. INTRODUCTION
G AIT planning and customization is one of the key
concerns for robotic assisted gait rehabilitation. Before
using robotic assisted gait rehabilitation for patients
suffered from Spinal Cord Injured (SCI) and stroke, gait
pattern should be planed and tailored for the patient. There
are two major strategies to generate the desired gait pattern.
Manuscript submitted Feb 9th ,2010.
Trieu Phat Luu is PhD student of School of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. (Phone: +65-
6790-5568; fax: +65-67935921; e-mail: luut0004@ntu.edu.sg).
H.B. Lim is PhD student of School of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. (e-mail:
limh0048@ntu.edu.sg).
Xingda Qu is Assistant Professor of School of Mechanical and
Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapores. (e-
mail: XDQU@ntu.edu.sg
K.H. Low is Professor of School of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. He is the
principal investigator of the project. (phone: 65-67905755; e-mail:
mkhlow@ntu.edu.sg).
The first strategy is using available data from literature.
Human kinematics were studied and lower limb joint angles
of healthy subjects walking normally were recorded and
presented in some textbooks [1, 2]. Robotic devices such as
WalkTrainer [3], Driven Gait Orthosis (DGO) [4] select the
averaged lower limb joint angle traces from textbook and
use them as reference trajectories in the rehabilitation
training process. On the other hand, desired trajectories for
assisted gait training robot such as ALEX [5] and Gait
Trainer GT-I [6] are obtained from their own database.
Some templates of desired ankle trajectories were
constructed from healthy subjects. A template is chosen for
training process when healthy subject’s dimensions,
primarily thigh and shank length, closely match with the
patient’s. However, the two strategies have some
disadvantages. Firstly, there are variations of the overall
patterns for the hip, knee and ankle [2]. Therefore, using an
averaged trajectory of normal walking people for patients
with different anatomy is not appropriate. In the second
strategy, the number of healthy subjects involved to
determine target trajectory is small. Moreover, gait pattern
and parameters not only depends on thigh and shank length
but also depends on some other parameters such as age,
gender, weight and height. Therefore, more data and details
of mapping algorithm are required to generate a suitable gait
pattern for a specified patient.
The gait pattern from healthy people is desired for gait
rehabilitation training but its proper definition is lacking.
Most of gait rehabilitation robots and devices used
simplified approaches to replicate lower limb kinematics [4,
7]. Little information on the gait pattern used for robotic
orthosis was revealed. It’s only known that the gait patterns
can be created according to the patient’s height and lower
limb joints’ range of motion [8].
Generating a gait pattern that resembles a healthy
human gait pattern is critical for the gait rehabilitation
process [9, 10]. However, based on the above arguments,
this problem has not been satisfactorily addressed.
In view of issues mentioned above, the concept of using
gait pattern generator (GaitGen) was introduced [11].
GaitGen is expected to generate and implement natural gait
patterns for robotic assisted gait rehabilitation. Gait pattern
is significantly affected by gait parameters such as stride
length and cadence. In this work, the method of generating
the gait parameters in explored.
The outline of this paper is as follows: the method of
using MLPNN to obtain gait parameters for GaitGen is
introduced in section II. This section also discusses about
MLPNN design and training algorithm. Section III describes
the experiment set up using GAITRite. Section IV presents
the results of MLPNN output and gait parameter calculation. accordingly to patient’s anatomy. The gait parameters
Finally, section V is the conclusion, discussion and future formula is modified as follows:
work. stride _ length
index = (2)
Patient’s Anatomy cadence × body _ height
Parameters MLPNN is proposed to suggest a prefer walking speed
Height for patient and the index for the gait parameters formula.
Doctor/ From the suggested values, the stride length and cadence can
Physiotherapy
Patient Physical be calculated for gait pattern generation. The detail of
Constraint defining gait pattern from gait parameters (stride length,
Measured cadence) is discussed in [11].
Gait Parameters A set of experiment with 30 healthy subjects walking at
Specified their preferred walking speed on GAITRite is conducted.
Walking
Their parameters such as: age, gender, leg length, height and
Speed
weight are recorded and the value of stride length and
cadence are measured during the experiment. Each
parameter has effect on stride length and cadence because
Normalized Gait the p-value obtained by using Anova testing method [14] is
Parameters Formula
Discussed in less than 0.01. However, the relationship between these five
this paper parameters and gait parameters (stride length, cadence) is
Stride Length and Cadence
non-linear and vague. Since MLPNN is a good method for
non-linear function approximation, it is used in this paper
Lower Limb Kinematics with these five parameters as inputs.
Database
B. MLPNN architecture design
Gait Pattern Mapping The proposed MLPNN has 1 input layer, 1 hidden layer,
Algorithm and 1 output layer. The input layer has 5 nodes and each
node represents an input variable. Similarly, the output layer
Extreme
has 4 nodes represent four output variables. The hidden
Gait Pattern Generator layer contains 16 neurons. W1 is the input weight matrix and
W2 is the layer weight matrix. bij is the bias value of neuron
Gait Pattern j in layer i . The MLPNN’s architecture is depicted in
Figure 2.
Fig.1. Overall concept of the gait pattern generator.

II. METHOD OF GAITGEN AND MLPNN DESIGN

A. Method of GaitGen
First of all, the patient’s anthropometric dimensions are
measured and a normal walking speed is specified by users
as inputs to GaitGen. The first step of gait pattern generation
is defining an appropriate walking speed for a specific
patient which is important in the whole rehabilitation
training process. In this paper, we applied a multi-layer
perceptron neural network to recommend a suitable walking
speed for a specific patient. After the users specify the
inputs, the normalized gait parameter module is able to
specify the suitable stride length and cadence.
GaitGen contains a module based on the normalized gait Fig.2. Architecture of MLPNN.
parameters formula which is first introduced by Inman et al. In forward computation process, each neuron in MPLNN
[12]. This formula describes the relationship between stride has an activation function to provide the output. In this
length, step frequency and body height as follows: paper, we use the hyperbolic tangent sigmoid transfer
stride _ length function which is derivative and give the output lies in the
= 0.008 (1) range of ( −1 ≤ y j (n) ≤ 1)
cadence × body _ height
bγ j ( n ) − bγ j ( n )
However, this formula is mainly derived for men and the e −e
constant value is not the same for subjects from Asian y j (n) = ϕ j ⎡⎣γ j (n) ⎤⎦ = a bγ j ( n ) − bγ j ( n )
(3)
e +e
population [13]. In this work, instead of using the constant
where:
value (0.008), we consider it as an index which is changing
 ϕ j : activation function of neuron j
γ j (n) : activation signal of neuron j
a,b: constant value
Before training the MLPNN, input vectors and targets
are scaled so that they fall in the range [-1, 1]. The output
vectors of the network will be trained to produce value in
the range [-1, 1]. These outputs will be converted back into
the original units.
C. Effect of the number of neurons in hidden layer
The number of neurons in hidden layer of MLPNN has a
significant effect on the output of the network. If the number
of neurons in hidden layer is small, the MLPNN will not
perform well on the training data and might be under-
trained. On the other hand, if the number of neurons in
hidden layer is large, it might be over-trained and perform
well on the training data but very bad on the test set. Our
purpose is to approximate the relationship between input and
output vectors by using MLPNN to minimize the difference
between output from MLPNN and desired output vectors.
Therefore, we can consider the mean square error (MSE) as
a fitness function and apply Genetic Algorithm (GA) to find
the optimal value of the number of neurons in the hidden
layer [15]. However, there are some disadvantages when
using GA. Firstly, the initial values of weight matrices W1,
W2 and bias vector bij , have effect on MSE, so we may
obtain several MSE values with the same number of neurons
in the hidden layer. Secondly, using GA, we will not be able
to display the effect of number of neurons in hidden layer on
the output. For these reasons, we apply the trial and error
method to compare MLPNNs with different numbers of
neurons in the hidden layer. The number of neurons in the
hidden layer will be varied from 6 to 20 to create 15
networks and each network will be run 100 times. After
each run, the value of stride length, slMLPNN and cadence,
cadenceMLPNN will be obtained (detail in section IV).When
the value slMLPNN out of the range sl ± σ sl or cadenceMLPNN
out of the range cadence ± σ cadence , this run will be
considered as fail. The effect of number of neurons in
hidden layer is illustrated in Figure 3. From this figure, we
choose 16 neurons in hidden layer for MLPNN which gives
98 success in 100 runs (98%).
Fig.3. Effect of number of neurons in hidden layer.
D. Learning algorithm
During the training process of MLPNN, input vectors are
applied to the neural network and responses from the neural
network will be obtained. The output vectors from neural
network are different from priori target responses by vector
error e(x). In order to approximate the non-linear
relationship between the input and output vectors, these
error must be minimized. For this purpose, a supervised
learning paradigm is applied to adjust the synaptic weights
of MLPNN so that its output vectors will match with desired
output vectors from data set.
Error back propagation (EBP), basically a gradient
descent search algorithm, was a significant breakthrough
training algorithm [16]. However, this algorithm has two
disadvantages: firstly, it is not robust and easy to be trapped
at local minimum value; secondly, the convergence rate is
very slow. Therefore, many attempts have been made to
improve the EBP algorithm. Lavenberg-Marquardt (LM)
method was invented and it is now considered as the most
efficient algorithm when the network contains no more than
a few hundred weights [17, 18].
When an input vector is applied to the network, the
forward calculation is conducted and an output response
from the network is given. The difference between network
output and target output is e(x), in which x is the input
vector. The function of neural networks is to minimize sum
of squares error function described by
N
E ( x ) = ∑ ei2 ( x) (4)
i =1
Applied the Newton method, the input vector x can be
updated as follows:
Δx = −[∇ 2 E ( x)]−1 ∇E ( x) (5)
where
∇E ( x) = J T ( x)e( x) (6)
∇ 2 E ( x) is the Hessian matrix and it can be approximated
as:
∇ 2 E ( x) = J T ( x) J ( x) (7)
where J ( x) is the Jacobian matrix
Then the update vector for the Gauss-Newton method is
Δx = −[ J T ( x) J ( x)]−1 J T ( x)e( x) (8)
Levenberg-Marquardt algorithm is a modification of
Newton method as follows:
Δx = −[ J T ( x) J ( x) + μ I ]−1 J T ( x)e( x) (9)
When the scalar μ is zero, LM algorithm becomes
Newton’s method. When μ is large, this becomes gradient
descent method.
III. DESIGN OF EXPERIMENT
We conduct experiment with thirty healthy subjects.
They are instructed to walk on GAITRite [19] five times at
normal walking speed that they feel comfortable with. The
parameters of vector x are recorded. The experiment data
provides a set of samples {x(i, j), yd(i, j)} for training and
testing of MLPNN.
 where Where mean value and standard deviation of index are
x : input vector which contains 5 parameters of subject’s given by:
anatomy 1 N
x=[age, gender, leg_length, height, weight] μindex = ∑ indexi (11)
N i =1
yd: desired output vector which contains 4 elements N
1
yd=[index, v, vmin, vmax]
v: walking velocity
σ index =
N
∑ (index − μ
i =1
i index )2 (12)

i: ith subject in the experiment, i=1 to 30 ( μindex ± σ index ) is the range of index obtained from
j: jth walking of one subject, j=1 to 5
experiment data (Table 1) and indexMLPNN is the value
When subjects walk on the GAITRite system, their stride
obtained from MLPNN for testing data. They are illustrated
length and cadence are recorded. The index value is derived
in Figure 4.
from the normalized gait equation [12] as follows:
stride _ length
index = (10)
cadence × body _ height
Among thirty healthy subjects involved in our
experiment, twenty-five subjects’ data were used for data
training and verification and the rest were used for testing
purpose. Desired output data for the five testing subjects are
recorded and computed in Table 1.
TABLE.1. EXPERIMENT DATA FOR THE TEST SET (5 SUBJECTS).
Index
Stride
Sub Walk Height Cadence Speed (Derived
Length
ject # (cm) (steps/min) (cm/s) from
(cm)
Eq.8)
1 #1 1.68 115.00 108.40 103.90 0.006315
1 #2 1.68 118.12 109.40 106.60 0.006427
1 #3 1.68 121.86 111.90 113.20 0.006482
1 #4 1.68 120.96 110.30 110.20 0.006528
1 #5 1.68 120.63 107.90 108.70 0.006654 Fig.4. Result of index for test set (5 subjects).
2 #1 1.65 121.53 113.20 112.40 0.006507
2 #2 1.65 134.03 109.10 122.30 0.007445 B. Comparison of velocity by MLPNN and experiment.
2 #3 1.65 141.33 109.10 128.20 0.007851
2 #4 1.65 134.98 109.10 123.10 0.007498 Similarly, the range of normal walking velocity
2 #5 1.65 137.63 108.60 124.00 0.007681
( μv ± σ v ), minimum and maximum value (vmin, vmax)in are
3 #1 1.75 134.20 115.80 130.40 0.006622
3 #2 1.75 129.00 111.90 121.10 0.006587 calculated from experiment data (Table 1). Output of
3 #3 1.75 127.54 114.50 122.30 0.006365
3 #4 1.75 122.16 110.70 113.60 0.006306
velocity vMLPNN and the range (vmin, vmax)MLPNN for 5 subjects
3 #5 1.75 121.99 110.30 112.90 0.006320 in test set are obtained after training MLPNN. The
4 #1 1.70 123.93 106.80 110.30 0.006826 comparison of vMLPNN and the range of desired value output
4 #2 1.70 125.65 105.60 110.70 0.006999
4 #3 1.70 126.45 106.80 113.40 0.006964 μv ± σ v is described in Figure 5. The comparison of (vmin,
4 #4 1.70 128.10 109.10 115.10 0.006907
4 #5 1.70 134.17 104.30 116.10 0.007567 vmax)MLPNN and (vmin, vmax)in is also displayed in Figure 5.
5 #1 1.74 140.95 121.20 142.30 0.006683
5 #2 1.74 136.20 113.70 129.40 0.006884
5 #3 1.74 137.31 115.40 132.00 0.006838
5 #4 1.74 136.01 117.10 133.80 0.006675
5 #5 1.74 137.16 119.00 135.50 0.006624

IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

By using MLPNN, we can obtain an appropriate index
and velocity for each person with particular input anatomy.
The stride length and cadence will be derived from
indexMLPNN and walking velocity which are the outputs from
MLPNN.
Even when a subject is instructed to walk at the speed
that he feels comfortable with, the value of his stride length,
cadence and velocity still vary. These differences are shown Fig.5. Result of velocity for test set (5 subjects).
in Table 1 and they are defined by standard deviation σ . Our purpose is to ensure that the gait parameters which
are the input for GaitGen [11] are as natural as possible.
A. Comparison of index by MLPNN and experiment. Since the output value indexMLPNN is within the range
From the data of each subject, we calculated the range of index ± σ index and vMLPNN is within the range μv ± σ v , we can
index ( μindex ± σ index ) .
conclude that using indexMLPNN and vMLPNN can provide an D. Comparison of stride length and cadence with index
estimation that is very close to natural gait parameters. given by MLPNN, index=0.008 and index=0.0072.
C. Comparison of stride length and cadence by MLPNN The value of index and velocity for subject 1 (Table 1)
and experiment obtained from 100 runs with 16 neurons in the hidden layer
are illustrated in Figure 8. The value of index is stable in
From the range (vmin, vmax)MLPNN, clinical practitioner can
100 runs and the velocity in the normal range.
choose an appropriate walking speed v . The recommended
value vMLPNN can be used as well. The walking speed and
index indexMLPNN are applied to define stride length slMLPNN
and cadence cadenceMLPNN as follows:
⎧ slMLPNN
⎪⎪index = cadence
MLPNN × height
⎨ (13)
⎪v = slMLPNN × cadenceMLPNN
⎪⎩ 120
From the experiment data of the test set (Table 1), the
range of stride length, sl ± σ sl and the range of cadence,
cadence ± σ cadence are calculated. The result of stride length
for 5 subjects in test set slMLPNN are calculated from (13) and
the desired output for sl ± σ sl are shown in Figure 6.

Fig.8. Index and velocity for in 100 runs (subject 1).

Fig.6. Result for stride length of test set (5 subjects).
From the value of index and velocity given by MLPNN,
the value of stride length and cadence can be calculated
from formula (13). The value of stride length and cadence
are illustrated in Figure 9. The results are stable and 98% in
the range of normal stride length and cadence.
The value of index in normalized gait equation [12] for
male is 0.008. Applying this equation for data obtained from
GAITRite experiment (detail in section III), the value of
index is 0.0072 for both male and female [11]. The value of
stride length and cadence with index=0.008 and
index=0.0072 are also computed and displayed in Figure 9.
With the same velocity, stride length and cadence calculated
from index given by MLPNN are closest to the ranges given
in the experiment.

Fig.7. Result for cadence of test set (5 subjects).

Similarly, the result of cadence calculated from (13)
cadenceMLPNN for 5 subjects in test set and the desired value
output of cadence from experiment data
cadence ± σ cadence are shown in Figure 7. Fig.9. Stride length and cadence in 100 runs (subject 1).
 V. CONCLUSION
The concept of using MLPNN to estimate the index
value and normal walking velocity is presented. The
estimated index value and normal walking velocity are then
used to compute stride length and cadence. After the gait
parameters are defined, gait patterns can be planned and
applied in gait rehabilitation process.
Instead of using a constant index value for normalization
gait equation (index=0.008), which was reported in [12],
MLPNN suggests different index value for different subject.
The value of constant index (0.008) in [12] was obtained by
fitted a straight line from data of 20 subjects. Because only
two out of the 20 subjects are women, this index is useful as
a reference only for men. By using MLPNN, the index can
be recommended both for men and women since gender is
one of the 5 parameters in the input vectors.
The initial study presented in this paper provides a
method to define gait parameter for gait planner. The
limitation of this study is that it only covers a small number
of Asian people involved in the experiment. In the future,
more experiments will be conducted to get more data for
training and test set of MLPNN so that the effectiveness and
efficiency of MLPNN will be studied more in depth.
VI. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank the technicians of
Robotics Research Center (RRC) of the Nanyang
Technological University (NTU) for their support to this
work. The financial supported by the NTU and the
equipment funded by the NMRC Research Grant 1051/2006
are also acknowledged.
and Biological Engineering and Computing, vol. 25, pp. 341-
344, 1987.
[10] A. L. Behrman and S. J. Harkema, "Locomotor training after
human spinal cord injury: A series of case studies," Physical
Therapy, vol. 80, pp. 688-700, 2000.
[11] H. B. Lim, K. H. Hoon, Y. C. Soh, A. Tow, and K. H. Low,
"Gait planning for effective rehabilitation - From gait study to
application in clinical rehabilitation," in 2009 IEEE
International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, ICORR
2009, pp. 271-276, 2009.
[12] H. R. V. T. Inman, and F. Todd, Human Walking, 1st ed.,
Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore/London, 1981.
[13] H. B. Lim, K. H. Hoon, Y. C. Soh, A. Tow, and K. H. Low,
"Effective gait planning for robotic rehabilitation - From normal
gait study to application in clinical rehabilitation," in
IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent
Mechatronics, AIM, pp. 1885-1890, 2009.
[14] D. C. Montgomery, Design and Analyis of Experiments, 5th ed.,
2001.
[15] M. J. Er and F. Liu, "Genetic algorithms for MLP neural network
parameters optimization," in 2009 Chinese Control and Decision
Conference, CCDC 2009, pp. 3653-3658, 2009.
[16] S. Haykin, Neural Networks- A Comprehensive Foundation, 2nd
ed., 1999.
[17] M. T. Hagan and M. B. Menhaj, "Training feedforward networks
with the Marquardt algorithm," IEEE Transactions on Neural
Networks, vol. 5, pp. 989-993, 1994.
[18] B. M. Wilamowski, Y. Chen, and A. Malinowski, "Efficient
algorithm for training neural networks with one hidden layer," in
Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Neural
Networks, vol. 3, pp. 1725-1728, 1999.
[19] ""GAITRite System," ", [Online]. Available:
http://www.gaitrite.com.

REFERENCES
[1] V. H. F. Margareta Nordin, Basic biomechanics of the
musculoskeletal system, 3rd ed., 2001.
[2] D. Winter, The biomechanics and motor control of human gait:
normal, elderly and pathological, 2nd ed. Waterloo: University
of Waterloo Press, 1991.
[3] Y. Allemand, Y. Stauffer, R. Clavel, and R. Brodard, "Design of
a new lower extremity orthosis for overground gait training with
the WalkTrainer," in 2009 IEEE International Conference on
Rehabilitation Robotics, ICORR 2009, pp. 550-555, 2009.
[4] G. Colombo, M. Joerg, R. Schreier, and V. Dietz, "Treadmill
training of paraplegic patients using a robotic orthosis," Journal
of Rehabilitation Research and Development, vol. 37, pp. 693-
700, 2000.
[5] S. K. Banala, S. H. Kim, S. K. Agrawal, and J. P. Scholz, "Robot
assisted gait training with active leg exoskeleton (ALEX)," IEEE
Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation
Engineering, vol. 17, pp. 2-8, 2009.
[6] S. Hussein, H. Schmidt, and J. Kruger, "Adaptive control of an
end-effector based electromechanical gait rehabilitation device,"
in 2009 IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation
Robotics, ICORR 2009, pp. 366-371, 2009.
[7] C. Y. E. Wang, J. E. Bobrow, and D. J. Reinkensmeyer,
"Dynamic motion planning for the design of robotic gait
rehabilitation," Journal of Biomechanical Engineering, vol. 127,
pp. 672-679, 2005.
[8] J. Hidler, W. Wisman, and N. Neckel, "Kinematic trajectories
while walking within the Lokomat robotic gait-orthosis,"
Clinical Biomechanics, vol. 23, pp. 1251-1259, 2008.
[9] H. Barbeau, M. Wainberg, and L. Finch, "Description and
application of a system for locomotor rehabilitation," Medical