MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2531582813 · doi:10.3390/computers5040022

Ambient Technology to Assist Elderly People in Indoor Risks

2016· article· en· W2531582813 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElderly peoplePsychological interventionAssistive technologyIndependent livingRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceMedicineGerontologyHuman–computer interactionNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While elderly people perform their daily indoor activities, they are subjected to several risks. To improve the quality of life of elderly people and promote healthy aging and independent living, elderly people need to be provided with an assistive technology platform to rely on during their activities. We reviewed the literature and identified the major indoor risks addressed by assistive technology that elderly people face during their indoor activities. In this paper, we identify these risks as: fall, wrong self-medication management, fire, burns, intoxication by gas/smoke, and the risk of inactivity. In addition, we discuss the existing assistive technology systems and classify the risk detection algorithms, techniques and the basic system principles and interventions to enhance safety of elderly people.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.259 · 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