User and Task Identification of Smartwatch Data with an Ensemble of Nonlinear Symbolic Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Smart devices are becoming more universally adopted and can be used to track and model user activity and monitor for abnormalities. Deviations from what is expected may indicate that a fall is imminent or that an injury has been sustained. Healthcare practitioners can use descriptive models of human kinematics as a tool to monitor patient recovery. This work extends previous work which generated descriptive nonlinear symbolic models of human kinematics with genetic programming. Previously, linear models were developed and compared to the nonlinear models. Although the linear models fit the data well, they were significantly worse than the nonlinear models. In this phase of the project, ensembles of nonlinear models were created to more accurately fit and classify data. Different model selection strategies for the ensembles were investigated. As one would expect, ensembles of models were significantly better than a single model classifier. It was also observed that, although more models in the ensemble yielded better results, only 2 models were required to obtain significantly better results. It was also observed that a random model selection strategy for the ensembles produced competitive results when compared to a more rigorous model selection strategy.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".