## 3 Results
### Angle-Angle Diagrams  
The area of the knee-angle/ankle-angle loops between PwMS vs. HC-1 at the same speed showed significant differences (\(p<0.05\), ES = \(-0.80\), Figure 2A), whereas the hip-angle/knee-angle loops did not show significant differences (\(p>0.05\); ES = \(-0.12\)). The perimeter differences at a speed of 1 km/h approaches significance between the knee-angle/ankle-angle loops (\(p\) = 0.086, ES = \(-0.53\)), but not between the hip-angle/knee-angle loops (\(p\) = 0.678; ES = \(-0.10\)) (Figure 2B). The area and perimeter comparisons within the HCs when they walked at different speeds (HC-1 vs. HC-3) were significant either between the hip-angle/knee-angle loops (\(p<0.001\), ES = \(-1.34\)/\(-1.42\)) or between the knee-angle/ankle-angle loops (\(p<0.001\), ES = \(-0.85\)/\(-1.27\)) (Figure 2A,B). The variability of two consecutive gait cycles (CV, %) between and within the subjects is reported in Table 3 and Figures 3-5.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Muscle (EMG\({}_{\text{RMS}}\))** & \begin{tabular}{c} **PwMS** \\ **ICC (LL-UL)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **HC-1** \\ **ICC (LL-UL)** \\ \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}{c} **HC-3** \\ **ICC (LL-UL)** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline  & \begin{tabular}{c} Weakest-Weakest \\ Gait1-Gait2 \\ \end{tabular} & \
\begin{tabular}{c} Dominant-Dominant \\ Gait1-Gait2 \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} Dominant-Dominant \\ Gait1-Gait2 \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline VL & 0.94 (0.83–0.99) & 0.97 (0.97–1.00) & 0.95 (0.88–0.99) \\ \hline BF & 0.94 (0.84–0.99) & 0.92 (0.80–0.99) & 0.91 (0.79–0.99) \\ \hline TA & 0.76 (0.51–0.97) & 0.83 (0.62–0.98) & 0.75 (0.50–0.96) \\ \hline LG & 0.95 (0.88–0.99) & 0.75 (0.50–0.96) & 0.75 (0.49–0.96) \\ \hline \hlineFigure 2: Values (SD) of areas (**A**) and perimeters (**B**) in the hip-knee and knee-ankle diagrams are reported in both groups (PwMS, HC-1 = 1 km/h and HC-3 = 3 km/h). * Difference between PwMS and HC-1 (\(p<0.05\)); ++ Difference between HC-3 and PwMS (\(p<0.001\)); ** Difference between HC-3 and HC-1 (\(p<0.001\)); NS = no significant difference between HC-1 and PwMS (\(p>0.05\)).  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Group** & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**CV between Subjects (\%)**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**CV within Subjects (\%)**} \\ \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Area} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Perimeter} & Area & Perimeter \\  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(Hip-Knee)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(Hip-Knee)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(Hip-Knee)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(Hip-Knee)} \\ \hline  & W/L & S/R & W/L & S/R & W-S/L-R & W-S/L-R \\ PwMS & 55.89 & 46.88 & 23.97 & 28.97 & 28.79 & 16.61 \\ HC-1 & 56.95 & 44.63 & 25.46 & 26.46 & 29.65 & 7.97 \\ HC-3 & 33.22 & 34.92 & 10.62 & 11.32 & 11.89 & 5.66 \\ \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Area} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Perimeter} & Area & Perimeter \\  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(Knee-Ankle)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(Knee-Ankle)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(Knee-Ankle)} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{(Knee-Ankle)} \\ \hline  & W/L & S/R & W/L & S/R & W-S/L-R & W-S/L-R \\ PwMS & 69.10 & 72.16 & 37.00 & 27.77 & 84.00 & 22.75 \\ HC-1 & 76.58 & 71.12 & 25.50 & 23.77 & 31.04 & 11.29 \\ HC-3 & 46.15 & 36.42 & 9.07 & 11.96 & 13.39 & 9.32 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: Coefficients of variation.  
Figure 4: Angle-angle plots of HC-1 (speed = 1 km/h). (**A**,**B**) are representative examples of one participant; (**C**,**D**) are the mean values of the HC group. The green lines indicate the phases between foot strike (FS) and maximal knee flexion during the stance phase (MKF-C).  
Figure 3: Angle-angle plots of PwMS. (**A**,**B**) are representative examples of one participant; (**C**,**D**) are the mean values of the PwMS group. The green lines indicate the phases between foot strike (FS) and maximal knee flexion during the stance phase (MKF-C).