The effect of window size and lead time on pre-impact fall detection accuracy using support vector machine analysis of waist mounted inertial sensor data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Falls are a major cause of death and morbidity in older adults. In recent years many researchers have examined the role of wearable inertial sensors (accelerometers and/or gyroscopes) to automatically detect falls. The primary goal of such fall monitors is to alert care providers of the fall event, who can then commence earlier treatment. Although such fall detection systems may reduce time until the arrival of medical assistance, they cannot help to prevent or reduce the severity of traumatic injury caused by the fall. In the current study, we extend the application of wearable inertial sensors beyond post-impact fall detection, by developing and evaluating the accuracy of a sensor system for detecting falls prior to the fall impact. We used support vector machine (SVM) analysis to classify 7 fall and 8 non-fall events. In particular, we focused on the effect of data window size and lead time on the accuracy of our pre-impact fall detection system using signals from a single waist sensor. We found that our system was able to detect fall events at between 0.0625-0.1875 s prior to the impact with at least 95% sensitivity and at least 90% specificity for window sizes between 0.125-1 s.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it