MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755586331 · doi:10.1109/embc.2017.8037326

A Gaussian process regression model for walking speed estimation using a head-worn IMU

2017· article· en· W2755586331 on OpenAlexaff
Shaghayegh Zihajehzadeh, Edward J. Park

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInertial measurement unitComputer sciencePreferred walking speedGlobal Positioning SystemKrigingSimulationAccelerometerTime domainAccelerationWearable computerArtificial intelligenceComputer visionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Miniature inertial sensors mainly worn on waist, ankle and wrist have been widely used to measure walking speed of the individuals for lifestyle and/or health monitoring. Recent emergence of head-worn inertial sensors in the form of a smart eyewear (e.g. Recon Jet) or a smart ear-worn device (e.g. Sensixa e-AR) provides an opportunity to use these sensors for estimation of walking speed in real-world environment. This work studies the feasibility of using a head-worn inertial sensor for estimation of walking speed. A combination of time-domain and frequency-domain features of tri-axial acceleration norm signal were used in a Gaussian process regression model to estimate walking speed. An experimental evaluation was performed on 15 healthy subjects during free walking trials in an indoor environment. The results show that the proposed method can provide accuracies of better than around 10% for various walking speed regimes. Additionally, further evaluation of the model for long (15-minutes) outdoor walking trials reveals high correlation of the estimated walking speed values to the ones obtained from fusion of GPS with inertial sensors.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations32
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringFrench-language works237,207