MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901081366 · doi:10.2196/11201

Applying Multivariate Segmentation Methods to Human Activity Recognition From Wearable Sensors’ Data

2018· article· en· W2901081366 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kenan Li, Rima Habre, Huiyu Deng, Robert Urman, John L. Morrison, Frank D. Gilliland, José Luis Ambite, Dimitris Stripelis, Yao‐Yi Chiang, Yijun Lin, Alex Bui, Christine King, Anahita Hosseini, Eleanne van Vliet, Majid Sarrafzadeh, Sandrah P. Eckel

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Biomedical Imaging and BioengineeringNational Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
KeywordsWearable computerComputer scienceMultivariate statisticsArtificial intelligenceSegmentationPattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Time-resolved quantification of physical activity can contribute to both personalized medicine and epidemiological research studies, for example, managing and identifying triggers of asthma exacerbations. A growing number of reportedly accurate machine learning algorithms for human activity recognition (HAR) have been developed using data from wearable devices (eg, smartwatch and smartphone). However, many HAR algorithms depend on fixed-size sampling windows that may poorly adapt to real-world conditions in which activity bouts are of unequal duration. A small sliding window can produce noisy predictions under stable conditions, whereas a large sliding window may miss brief bursts of intense activity. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to create an HAR framework adapted to variable duration activity bouts by (1) detecting the change points of activity bouts in a multivariate time series and (2) predicting activity for each homogeneous window defined by these change points. METHODS: We applied standard fixed-width sliding windows (4-6 different sizes) or greedy Gaussian segmentation (GGS) to identify break points in filtered triaxial accelerometer and gyroscope data. After standard feature engineering, we applied an Xgboost model to predict physical activity within each window and then converted windowed predictions to instantaneous predictions to facilitate comparison across segmentation methods. We applied these methods in 2 datasets: the human activity recognition using smartphones (HARuS) dataset where a total of 30 adults performed activities of approximately equal duration (approximately 20 seconds each) while wearing a waist-worn smartphone, and the Biomedical REAl-Time Health Evaluation for Pediatric Asthma (BREATHE) dataset where a total of 14 children performed 6 activities for approximately 10 min each while wearing a smartwatch. To mimic a real-world scenario, we generated artificial unequal activity bout durations in the BREATHE data by randomly subdividing each activity bout into 10 segments and randomly concatenating the 60 activity bouts. Each dataset was divided into ~90% training and ~10% holdout testing. RESULTS: In the HARuS data, GGS produced the least noisy predictions of 6 physical activities and had the second highest accuracy rate of 91.06% (the highest accuracy rate was 91.79% for the sliding window of size 0.8 second). In the BREATHE data, GGS again produced the least noisy predictions and had the highest accuracy rate of 79.4% of predictions for 6 physical activities. CONCLUSIONS: In a scenario with variable duration activity bouts, GGS multivariate segmentation produced smart-sized windows with more stable predictions and a higher accuracy rate than traditional fixed-size sliding window approaches. Overall, accuracy was good in both datasets but, as expected, it was slightly lower in the more real-world study using wrist-worn smartwatches in children (BREATHE) than in the more tightly controlled study using waist-worn smartphones in adults (HARuS). We implemented GGS in an offline setting, but it could be adapted for real-time prediction with streaming data.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations40
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicContext-Aware Activity Recognition SystemsFrench-language works237,207