Automatic Detection and Classification of Unsafe Events During Power Wheelchair Use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a powered wheelchair (PW) is a complex task requiring advanced perceptual and motor control skills. Unfortunately, PW incidents and accidents are not uncommon and their consequences can be serious. The objective of this paper is to develop technological tools that can be used to characterize a wheelchair user's driving behavior under various settings. In the experiments conducted, PWs are outfitted with a datalogging platform that records, in real-time, the 3-D acceleration of the PW. Data collection was conducted over 35 different activities, designed to capture a spectrum of PW driving events performed at different speeds (collisions with fixed or moving objects, rolling on incline plane, and rolling across multiple types obstacles). The data was processed using time-series analysis and data mining techniques, to automatically detect and identify the different events. We compared the classification accuracy using four different types of time-series features: 1) time-delay embeddings; 2) time-domain characterization; 3) frequency-domain features; and 4) wavelet transforms. In the analysis, we compared the classification accuracy obtained when distinguishing between safe and unsafe events during each of the 35 different activities. For the purposes of this study, unsafe events were defined as activities containing collisions against objects at different speed, and the remainder were defined as safe events. We were able to accurately detect 98% of unsafe events, with a low (12%) false positive rate, using only five examples of each activity. This proof-of-concept study shows that the proposed approach has the potential of capturing, based on limited input from embedded sensors, contextual information on PW use, and of automatically characterizing a user's PW driving behavior.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".