Classification of Physical Activity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical activity has a wide range of effects on glucose concentrations in type 1 diabetes (T1D) depending on the type (ie, aerobic, anaerobic, mixed) and duration of activity performed. This variability in glucose responses to physical activity makes the development of artificial pancreas (AP) systems challenging. Automatic detection of exercise type and intensity, and its classification as aerobic or anaerobic would provide valuable information to AP control algorithms. This can be achieved by using a multivariable AP approach where biometric variables are measured and reported to the AP at high frequency. We developed a classification system that identifies, in real time, the exercise intensity and its reliance on aerobic or anaerobic metabolism and tested this approach using clinical data collected from 5 persons with T1D and 3 individuals without T1D in a controlled laboratory setting using a variety of common types of physical activity. The classifier had an average sensitivity of 98.7% for physiological data collected over a range of exercise modalities and intensities in these subjects. The classifier will be added as a new module to the integrated multivariable adaptive AP system to enable the detection of aerobic and anaerobic exercise for enhancing the accuracy of insulin infusion strategies during and after exercise.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".