MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083106564 · doi:10.1109/ccnc.2011.5766464

Recognition of false alarms in fall detection systems

2011· article· en· W2083106564 on OpenAlexaff
Stefano Abbate, Marco Avvenuti, Guglielmo Cola, Paolo Corsini, Janet Light, Alessio Vecchio

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsALARMAccelerometerWearable computerComputer scienceFalse alarmPopulationPoison controlArtificial intelligenceComputer securityMedical emergencyMedicineEngineeringEmbedded system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Falls are a major cause of hospitalization and injury-related deaths among the elderly population. The detrimental effects of falls, as well as the negative impact on health services costs, have led to a great interest on fall detection systems by the health-care industry. The most promising approaches are those based on a wearable device that monitors the movements of the patient, recognizes a fall and triggers an alarm. Unfortunately such techniques suffer from the problem of false alarms: some activities of daily living are erroneously reported as falls, thus reducing the confidence of the user. This paper presents a novel approach for improving the detection accuracy which is based on the idea of identifying specific movement patterns into the acceleration data. Using a single accelerometer, our system can recognize these patterns and use them to distinguish activities of daily living from real falls; thus the number of false alarms is reduced.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.077
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.159 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207