Improved estimation of energy expenditure by artificial neural network modeling
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
Estimation of energy expenditure in daily living conditions can be a tool for clinical assessment of health status, as well as a self-measure of lifestyle and general activity levels. Criterion measures are either prohibitively expensive or restricted to laboratory settings. Portable devices (heart rate monitors, pedometers) have gained recent popularity, but accuracy of the prediction equations remains questionable. This study applied an artificial neural network modeling approach to the problem of estimating energy expenditure with different dynamic inputs (accelerometry, heart rate above resting (HRar), and electromyography (EMG)). Nine feed-forward back-propagation models were trained, with the goal of minimizing the mean squared error (MSE) of the training datasets. Model 1 (accelerometry only) and model 2 (HRar only) performed poorly and had significantly greater MSE than all other models (p < 0.001). Model 3 (combined accelerometry and HRar) had overall performance similar to EMG models. Validation of all models was performed by simulating untrained datasets. MSE of all models increased when tested with validation data. While models 1 and 2 again performed poorly, model 3 MSE was lower than all but 2 EMG models. Squared correlation coefficients of measured and predicted energy expenditure for models 3 to 9 ranged from 0.745 to 0.817. Analysis of mean error within specific movement categories indicates that EMG models may be better at predicting higher-intensity energy expenditure, but combined accelerometry and HRar provides an economical solution, with sufficient accuracy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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